Public Document Pack

AGENDA

PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

Date: Thursday, 4 March 2021 Time: 7.00 pm Venue: Virtual Meeting Via Skype*

Membership:

Councillors Cameron Beart, Monique Bonney, Roger Clark, Simon Clark, Richard Darby, Mike Dendor, Tim Gibson (Chairman), James Hall, James Hunt, Carole Jackson, Elliott Jayes (Vice-Chairman), Peter Marchington, Ben J Martin, David Simmons, Paul Stephen, Tim Valentine and Tony Winckless.

Quorum = 6

RECORDING NOTICE Please note: this meeting may be recorded and the recording may be published on the Council’s website.

At the start of the meeting the Chairman will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being audio recorded. The whole of the meeting will be recorded, except where there are confidential or exempt items.

You should be aware that the Council is a Data Controller under the Data Protection Act. Data collected during this recording will be retained in accordance with the Council’s data retention policy.

Therefore by attending the meeting and speaking at Committee you are consenting to being recorded and to the possible use of those sound records for training purposes.

If you have any queries regarding this please contact Democratic Services.

Pages Information for the Public *Members of the press and public can listen to this meeting live. Details of how to join the meeting will be added to the website after 4pm on Wednesday 3 March 2021.

Privacy Statement

Swale Borough Council (SBC) is committed to protecting the privacy and security of your personal information. As data controller we ensure that processing is carried out in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulations. In calling to join the meeting

your telephone number may be viewed solely by those Members and Officers in attendance at the Skype meeting and will not be shared further. No other identifying information will be made available through your joining to the meeting. In joining the meeting you are providing the Council with your consent to process your telephone number for the duration of the meeting. Your telephone number will not be retained after the meeting is finished.

If you have any concerns or questions about how we look after your personal information or your rights as an individual under the Regulations, please contact the Data Protection Officer by email at [email protected] or by calling 01795 417179.

1. Apologies for Absence and Confirmation of Substitutes

2. Minutes

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 4 February 2021 (Minute Nos. 439 - 443) as a correct record.

3. Declarations of Interest

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a) Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011. The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared. After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote. This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b) Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012. The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared. After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

(c) Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the meeting while that item is considered.

Advice to Members: If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

Part B reports for the Planning Committee to decide

4. Report of the Head of Planning Services 5 - 180

To consider the attached report (Parts 2, 3 and 5).

The Council operates a scheme of public speaking at meetings of the Planning Committee. All applications on which the public has registered to speak will be taken first. Requests to speak at the meeting must be registered with Democratic Services ([email protected] or call 01795 417328) by noon on Wednesday 3 March 2021.

5. Exclusion of the Press and Public

To decide whether to pass the resolution set out below in respect of the following items:

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

1. Information relating to any individual. 2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual. 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). See note below. 4. Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and any employees of, or office holders under, the authority. 5. Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings. 6. Information which reveals that the authority proposes (a) To give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or (b) To make an order or direction under any enactment. 7. Information relation to any action in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime.

6. Report of the Head of Planning Services 181 - 196 To consider the attached report (Part 6).

Issued on Tuesday, 23 February 2021

The reports included in Part I of this agenda can be made available in alternative formats. For further information about this service, or to arrange for special facilities to be provided at the meeting, please contact DEMOCRATIC SERVICES on 01795 417330. To find out more about the work of the Planning Committee, please visit www.swale.gov.uk

Chief Executive, Swale Borough Council, Swale House, East Street, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 3HT

Agenda Item 4

SWALE BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING SERVICES

Planning Items to be submitted to the Planning Committee

4 MARCH 2021

Standard Index to Contents

DEFERRED ITEMS Items shown in previous Minutes as being deferred from that meeting may be considered at this meeting

PART 1 Reports to be considered in public session not included elsewhere on this Agenda

PART 2 Applications for which permission is recommended

PART 3 Applications for which refusal is recommended

PART 4 Swale Borough Council’s own development; observation on County Council’s development; observations on development in other districts or by Statutory Undertakers and by Government Departments; and recommendations to the County Council on ‘County Matter’ applications.

PART 5 Decisions by County Council and the Secretary of State on appeal, reported for information

PART 6 Reports containing “Exempt Information” during the consideration of which it is anticipated that the press and public will be excluded

ABBREVIATIONS: commonly used in this Agenda

CDA Crime and Disorder Act 1998

GPDO The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015

HRA Human Rights Act 1998

SBLP Swale Borough Local Plan 2017

Page 5 This page is intentionally left blank INDEX OF ITEMS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE – 4 MARCH 2021

• Minutes of last Planning Committee Meeting • Deferred Items • Minutes of any Working Party Meetings

PART 2

2.1 18/502190/EIHYB SITTINGBOURNE Land North Quinton Road

2.2 20/502407/FULL HERNHILL Land South East Of A299 Slip Road Off Thanet Way Highstreet Road

2.3 20/505412/FULL THROWLEY Land Adjacent To Heel Farm Heel Rd

PART 3

3.1 21/500012/FULL MINSTER 59 Wards Hill Road

3.2 20/505466/FULL Sheerness Napier Hotel 1 Alma Road

PART 5 - INDEX

5.1 20/503210/FULL NEWINGTON 19 The Willows

5.2 20/500555/FULL MILSTEAD Broadoak Farm, Broadoak Road

5.3 19/500029/FULL NEWINGTON Land to the rear of 132 High Street

5.4 19/504417/FULL OSPRINGE Black Cottages Mutton Lane

5.5 19/502937/FULL MINSTER SE side of Highview Road adj Minster Methodist Church

Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 4 MARCH 2021 PART 2

Report of the Head of Planning

PART 2

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

2.1 REFERENCE NO - 18/502190/EIHYB APPLICATION PROPOSAL Phase 1 North - Erection of 91 dwellings accessed from Grovehurst Road, public open and amenity space (including an equipped children's play area) together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration basins and tanked permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works. Full Planning Application - Phase 1 South - Erection of 257 dwellings (including 35 affordable dwellings) accessed from Quinton Road, public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration swales, ring soakaways, and permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works. Outline Planning Application - for up to 852 new dwellings (including 10% affordable housing), a site of approximately 10 ha for a secondary and primary school, a mixed use local centre, including land for provision of a convenience store, public open and amenity space (including equipped children's play areas), together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station and sustainable drainage systems), utilities and service infrastructure. All matters reserved. ADDRESS Land North Quinton Road Sittingbourne Kent ME10 2SX RECOMMENDATION GRANT Subject to the views of KCC Education in respect of the BREEAM conditions for the proposed schools, the signing of a suitably worded Section 106 agreement (to secure the mitigation set out at paragraphs 9.16.1 to 9.16.3 below) and the conditions set out below. Authority is also sought to amend the wording of the Section 106 agreement and the wording of conditions as may reasonably be required. SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: The proposed development would accord with the requirements of the adopted Local Plan (Bearing Fruits, adopted 2017) and, in particular, Policy MU1, which allocates the wider site (of which the application site makes up the majority) for a minimum of 1500 dwellings. By providing up to 1200 dwellings, this development would make a major contribution to the delivery of housing in Swale, and in particular Sittingbourne.

Other key benefits of the development would be the provision of land for the delivery of two schools (a secondary to serve the development and to cater for significant existing demand from the wider area and to broaden choice in the Sittingbourne area; a primary to serve the proposed development), a country park and substantial areas of other open space and strategic landscaping; a spine road would provide to create a new connection between Quinton Road and Grovehurst Road; the provision of 120 affordable dwellings; and the provision of a mixed use local centre.

Page 9 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

With specific regard to the details area of the development (namely Phase 1 South and Phase 1 North), it is considered that the development would deliver a good layout, with well-designed homes, and without giving rise to any significant amenity concerns. Any adverse impacts that would otherwise have resulted from the development will be mitigated by developer contributions as summarised below and the imposition of conditions (also set out below). REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Objection from Bobbing Parish Council, and the very substantial scale of the development.

WARDS: Kemsley; PARISH COUNCIL Bobbing APPLICANT Persimmon Bobbing, Iwade and Lower (part of the site – to the west Homes Ltd Halstow: and The Meads. of the ditch running through AGENT JB Planning Associates the centre of the site is located within Bobbing Parish); Members will note that most of the site falls within the Sittingbourne area, which is un-parished. Iwade Parish is located to the north of the site, though is separated from it by the A249. DECISION DUE DATE Extension of the original time limit will be agreed in due course.

Planning History (for application site)

15/506121/ENVSCR EIA Screening Opinion - A sustainable urban extension comprising up to 1,400 new dwellings (of a range of sizes, types and tenures, including affordable housing), a site of 10.00ha for a secondary and primary schools, and public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping, access, highways (including footpaths and cycleways), parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station), utilities and service infrastructure works EIA Required Decision Date: 21.08.2015

15/506821/EIASCO EIA Scoping Opinion - A sustainable urban extension comprising up to 1,400 new dwellings (of a range of sizes, types and tenures, including affordable housing), a site of 10.00ha for a secondary and primary schools, and public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping, access, highways (including footpaths and cycleways), parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station), utilities and service infrastructure works Decision Date: 2.12.2015

16/506014/EIASCO EIA Scoping Opinion - A sustainable urban extension comprising up to 1,100 new dwellings (of a range of sizes, types and tenures, including affordable housing), a site of 10.50 ha for a secondary and primary school, and public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping,

Page 10 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1 access, highways (including footpaths and cycle ways), parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station), utilities and service infrastructure works. Decision Date: 12.04.2017

Planning History (relating to adjacent sites)

19/501845/OUT – Members resolved, at the Planning Committee on 27 January 2020, that outline planning permission (with all matters reserved) should be granted for the erection of 23 dwellings with access road on land to the rear on land at 2 Bramblefield Lane, Kemsley subject to conditions and the signing of a suitably-worded Section 106 agreement. The decision notice has not yet been issued for this development, which would adjoin the northern part of the site of the current application, as the drafting of the s106 Agreement is on-going.

18/500257/EIFUL – Planning permission was granted on 21st December 2020 for the development of 155 dwellings (9 x 2 bed flats, 13 x 2 bed houses, 66 x 3 bed houses, and 67 x 4 bed houses) together with associated new access road, car parking, linear park with acoustic barrier to the A249, dedicated LEAP, allotments, areas of surface water drainage attenuation and ecological enhancement, and new planting, including an area planted in the style of an orchard on 8.74 hectares of land in the south-west corner of the Local Plan (Policy MU1) allocation, with its northern and eastern boundaries adjoining the site of the current application. Among other things, Members will note that the applicant has committed to achieving a 14% betterment to the requirements of the current Building Regulations in terms of minimising CO2 emissions associated with the development.

18/502372/EIOUT - Outline application for the development of up to 115 dwellings and all necessary supporting infrastructure including emergency access, roads, footpath and cycle links, open space, play areas and landscaping, parking, drainage and all utilities and surface infrastructure works on 4.98 hectares of land at the northern end of the Local Plan allocation, between Grovehurst Road and Swale Way (and known as land at Great Grovehurst Farm). All detailed matters are reserved for subsequent approval except (a) mitigation of impacts on Great Crested Newts; (b) vehicular access to Grovehurst Road and (c) extraction of brickearth. This application is to be approved under delegated powers. Assessment of it is at an advanced stage, though the s106 agreement to accompany the permission has not yet been completed.

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.1 The site comprises a total of 64.5 hectares of arable farmland on the western edge of Sittingbourne. This can be sub-divided into 11 hectares located to the north of Bramblefield Lane and the public right of way ZU54 (and known as Pheasant Farm) and approximately 53.5 hectares to the south of this. As noted in the Planning Statement, the northern parcel “…comprises largely of an artificial mound…constructed from spoil arising from the construction of the adjacent A249 road.” The southern portion is further sub- divided by a ditch and intermittent tree / hedge line running south-west across the site and by a field boundary (featuring intermittent trees and hedging) running south-east from Bramblefield Lane to the eastern boundary of the site.

1.2 The boundaries of the site are defined as follows: to the west, the site adjoins the A249 dual-carriageway, which connects the M2 to Sittingbourne and Isle-of-Sheppey and is classified as a trunk road. To the south, the site fronts Quinton Road. Meads Avenue and the more-recent Meads housing estate are located immediately to the south of Quinton Road. To the east, the southern parcel is bounded by the railway line, which links the main London-Dover line to Kemsley and the Isle-of-Sheppey. At the northern end of the southern parcel, the site adjoins the Kemsley Halt Station and the Grovehurst Surgery

Page 11 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

medical centre. The Bramblefield Lane cul-de-sac – characterised by a mix of single- and two-storey dwellings and some chalet bungalows - forms part of the northern boundary of the southern parcel and the southern boundary of the northern parcel.

1.3 The Environmental Statement describes the topography of the site as follows:

“The topography of the site comprises a very gradual slope from c.20 AOD (Above Ordnance Datum) in the central-west…at Bramblefield Lane down to the south-east at the railway line. The north of the site between Bramblefield Lane and Swale Way comprises gently undulating land at around 18m AOD, and the extreme north of the site lies on a very gradual slope from c.10m AOD on Swale Way down towards Coldharbour Marshes in the north which lie below 5m AOD.”

1.4 Although the site is predominantly open in character given its use for arable farming, there are some areas of hedge and tree growth on the site, and Members will note that these are generally confined to the site boundaries, exceptions being the areas alongside the ditch that bisects the southern parcel and the field boundary located towards the northern end of the southern parcel, which runs north-east from the central ditch and connects with public right of ZU54 (just to the west of Bramblefield Lane). Both areas are characterised by intermittent tree growth, which includes a number of native species such as field maple (acer campestre) and hawthorn (crataegus monogyna). The application is accompanied by a comprehensive Tree Survey and plans that describe the trees on site and their condition and grade.

1.5 With regard to public rights of way, in addition to ZU54, ZR110 and ZU6 run north-west across the southern part of the site before running alongside the boundary with the A249 corridor and then ultimately connecting to ZU54, close to the pedestrian footbridge over the A249. Immediately to the east of the site, ZU6 crosses (at-grade) the railway line.

1.6 As well as being a public right of way, the path from the western end of Bramblefield Lane forms part of the National Cycle Route network, meaning that as well as the formal pedestrian route, there is an important link for cyclists between Kemsley and locations to the west (including Bobbing and Iwade) bisecting the application site.

1.7 The application is supported by a drawing showing the agricultural land classifications for the site; almost all of the site is classed as Best and Most Versatile (ie Grades 1, 2 and 3a), while small parts of the site are identified as 3b and ‘other’.

1.8 With regard to brick earth, Members will note that a detailed Minerals Assessment was submitted with the application. Among other things, it acknowledges the existence of some brick-earth on the site, but states that it “…effectively comprises a thin, gravelly deposit of limited lateral extent in the central section of the site.” This issue is fully evaluated in the ‘appraisal’ section below, and Members will also note the summary of the response from KCC Waste and Minerals at Paragraph 7.11 below.

1.9 With regard to heritage assets, none of the site is within – or close to – a conservation area; Bramblefield Farmhouse, which is the last dwelling on the southern side of Bramblefield Lane, is a Grade II listed building; the southern and western boundaries of its curtilage adjoin the application site. There are further Grade II listed buildings on land just to the south and west of the application site, namely Quinton Cottage and Quinton Farmhouse. Grovehurst Farmhouse, another Grade II listed building, lies on the eastern

Page 12 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

side of Grovehurst Road, facing the northern part of the application site, where a Country Park is proposed. Featherbed House, which although not listed is considered to be of some heritage value, is located adjacent to the northern tip of the application site, on land set down from the adjacent Grovehurst Road junction with the A249 and Swale Way.

1.10 The majority of the site lies outside the Important Countryside Gap. However, Members will note that a strip of land parallel to the A249 corridor – projecting a typical 50 metres into the application site – and a more substantial area of land at the northern end of the site fall within this designation. Members will note that the original Design and Access Statement contains – on page 20 – a plan showing the extent of the relevant part of the Countryside Gap. Plans showing the gap boundary over-lain on the proposed development layout have now been provided. This issue is dealt with in the ‘appraisal’ section below.

1.11 Members will note that none of the application site is subject to a local, county-level or national landscape designation.

1.12 A high-pressure gas pipeline runs approximately east-west across the centre of the site (within the area the application is in outline form).

2. PROPOSAL

2.1 The application is in hybrid form and can be divided into three main parts:

2.2 In Phase 1 North, detailed planning permission is sought for the development of 11.35 hectares of land to provide 91 houses, public open space in the form of a Country Park (measuring 7.12 hectares) and incorporating a Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play and ancillary works, including an acoustic barrier along the boundary with the A249. The proposed housing in this phase is set back from the boundary with the A249 corridor by a minimum of 57 metres towards the southern end (at Plot 265). At this point, the gap between the Spine Road and the A249 boundary would be 42 metres. At the northern end of the phase, Plot 342 would be located a minimum of 143 metres from the boundary with the A249 corridor (while the gap between the Spine Road and the A249 boundary would be 125 metres).

2.3 In Phase 1 South, detailed planning permission is sought for the development of 257 dwellings – including 34 affordable dwellings – on a site area of 7.97 hectares, which will include 1.2 hectares for green infrastructure. The dwellings would be a mix of houses and flats.

2.4 Outline planning permission with all matters reserved is sought in respect of the remaining 45.2 hectares of the site, where permission is sought for up to 852 dwellings, a secondary school and a primary school on a site extending to just under ten hectares (it has been agreed that the extent of the land to be transferred will be 9.89 hectares), a mixed use Local Centre on a site of a minimum of 0.5 hectares and supporting infrastructure, including open space, strategic landscaping, play areas and road infrastructure, including a Spine Road that will ultimately connect with corresponding sections of road in the areas of development to the south and north, allowing the creation of a link road running from Quinton Road in the south to Grovehurst Road in the north, where a new roundabout would be provided.

Page 13 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

2.5 Members will note that the application includes a ‘Planning Budget’ drawing, which provides a visual summary of what is proposed, showing the disposition of the key aspects of the application such as the housing areas (detailed and outline), the site for the two schools, the local centre, and the public open spaces. Other key features such as the spine road and the noise barrier adjacent to the A249 are also shown. The drawing also sets out the dimensions of the key components of the scheme together with the densities for the respective housing areas.

Phase 1 North

2.6 With regard to Phase 1 (North) and Phase 1 (South), Materials Plans have been provided for both and these give a broad indication of the applicant’s intentions in respect of facing materials for the walls of buildings and roofing. The applicant has also provided examples of facing bricks that they consider would be appropriate for this development. The issue is discussed further in the ‘appraisal’ section below.

2.7 In this phase, the 91 houses proposed would be developed on a net developable area of 2.4 hectares giving an average density of 38 dwellings per hectare. The layout shows a mix of detached, semi-detached and short terraces of three houses arranged to continue the built frontage on the northern side of Bramblefield Lane (though vehicular access would be via the new layout and not directly from Bramblefield Lane, which would remain a cul-de-sac), with a corresponding building line; six detached houses are shown in this area (on Plots 271 to 276), and these would sit within the setting of the Grade II listed Bramblefield Farmhouse. These house types have been designed with the relative sensitivity of the location in mind, with particular attention being paid to the design and detailing of them. With specific regard to Plots 271 to 276, detached houses on these six plots. Members will note that dedicated conditions are included below in an effort to ensure that the facing materials, doors and other key details used are of a correspondingly high standard.

2.8 The layout in this area would back on to the existing properties at Bramblefield Lane, in particular numbers 34 to 52, and to the land for which Members have resolved to grant permission for 23 dwellings – on a site measuring approximately 0.65 hectares - under reference 19/501845/OUT, and which is described above. Phase 1 (North) would also have a long frontage with the Spine Road, where houses are proposed on its eastern side; street trees are proposed on both sides of the Spine Road to create an avenue. The layout would create three perimeter blocks, and although some cul-de-sacs are proposed, these would be configured in such a way that the layout would generally be permeable, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists.

2.9 With regard to architectural treatment, ten different house types are proposed, and the style is described by the applicant as ‘Kent vernacular’. The dwellings would be a mix of two-bedroom (25 units), three-bedroom (30 units), four-bedroom (15 units) and five- bedroom (21 units) dwellings. The floor areas of dwellings range from a minimum of 59.3 square metres to a maximum of 131.4 square metres (gross internal floor area). Amendments have been made to some of the house types to add extra detailing (for example, chimneys and windows to flank elevations) to key plots such as those on Plots 342 and 345 and Plots 259 and 258, which will be relatively prominently located.

Page 14 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

2.10 With regard to storey heights, the amended house types are a combination of two and 2.5 storeys in height. The number of the latter dwellings proposed is 10 and, in particular, no 2.5 storey units are now proposed on plots backing directly on to existing dwellings on Bramblefield Lane (previously five such dwellings were proposed in this part of the layout); Plots 334 and 335 are 2.5 storey and face towards Bramblefield Lane, but the plot behind them is the very large rear garden to 34 Bramblefield Lane and the separation between the new dwellings and the dwelling at 34 Bramblefield Lane would be just over 70 metres.

2.11 Full details of hard and soft landscaping for Phase 1 North have been provided in respect of the part of the phase where houses are proposed. The soft landscaping drawings (five in total) show a detailed scheme of tree and other planting that includes, but is not limited to, street trees addressing the Spine Road and the addition of trees to some of the rear gardens. Generally, the level of detail is sufficient, though only illustrative details of the landscaping for the Country Park have been provided; The ‘Illustrative Landscape Masterplan’ shows how the area could be configured with space for a Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play, a Kick-about space, a ‘wildlife area’ and a noise attenuation bund along the boundary with the A249 corridor. With regard to hard landscaping, full details of the proposed surfacing to roads and paths have been provided (the latter would be surfaced in a mix of tarmac, block paving and self-binding gravel), together with boundary treatment details, which are shown on the proposed layout and consist of a mix of walls, close boarded fencing, parkland metal estate railings and timber post and rail fencing.

2.12 With regard to photovoltaic panels, these are shown on drawing 1076_54 Sheet No 2, and Members will note that the applicant is proposing to install panels on the rear roof slopes of 20 of the proposed dwellings.

2.13 This phase has a total of 201 car parking spaces, including 18 visitor car parking spaces.

2.14 All of the dwellings in this phase would be for private sale.

2.15 Detailed approval is also sought for the length of Spine Road between the proposed houses and the junction with Grovehurst Road, where a roundabout is proposed. The roundabout – which is detailed on drawing D118_12 Revision C – would also accommodate vehicular access to the residential development proposed on land at Great Grovehurst Farm (application reference 18/502372/EIOUT).

2.16 With regard to electric vehicle charging points, these are identified on the layout drawing (namely P1076_10 Sheet 2 Rev ZJ, and Members will note that an EV charging point is proposed for each house.

Phase 1 South

2.17 Phase 1 (South) consists of 257 dwellings on a net developable area of 5.54 hectares giving a typical density of 44 dwellings per hectare.

2.18 The Phase is bounded on its southern side by Quinton Road, the branch railway line to the Isle-of-Sheppey to the east and the boundary with the southern part of the proposed Redrow development (see 18/500257/EIFUL – the full description is given above) to the west, though a line of established poplar trees will provide a green buffer between the two housing areas. To the north, further housing is proposed, though this is in outline form so

Page 15 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

full details have not been provided. The southern vehicular entrance to the development would be taken from Quinton Road (and is detailed on drawing 27239-5504-021 Revision G) and the Spine Road would form an avenue running north-south through the phase; various streets are proposed which run approximately east-west from this main road. The dwellings would be arranged into a number of perimeter blocks, creating an outward- facing development. Members will also note that a linear open space is proposed along the western, southern and eastern boundaries of the phase to, among other things, allow for informal recreation and non-car travel. An area for informal play is proposed within the open space close to the south-east corner of the development, facing Plots 37, 104 and 105.

2.19 With regard to storey heights, these are shown on drawing ‘Phase 1 South Building heights’, and Members will note that a mix of two storey houses (which predominate), 2.5 storey houses (34 units), 3 storey houses (17 units) and three storey apartments (five blocks containing a total of 35 flats).

2.20 With regard to architectural treatment, 12 different house types are proposed and four different apartment block types (a total of five apartment blocks are proposed), and following negotiations with officers and local Members, the originally-proposed ‘vernacular’ house and flat types have been replaced with a proposal for dwellings with a contemporary architectural treatment, and the latest Addendum to the Design and Access Statement asserts that this phase “…now has a very distinctive character, which will help announce and define a new high quality Sittingbourne neighbourhood”.

2.21 The document also explains that:

“Phase 1 South now includes a range of contemporary detailing including: large pain windows, vertical brick banding, contemporary Juliet balconies, vertical weatherboarding and contemporary box bay windows.”

2.22 The houses (221 in total) would be a mix of two-bedroom (110 units), three-bedroom (47 units), four-bedroom (51 units) and five-bedroom (13 units) dwellings. The apartments (36 in total), would be a mix of 1 bed M4(3) (two units), 1 bed (13 units), and 2 bed (21 units) dwellings. The floor areas of dwellings range from a minimum of 46.8 square metres to a maximum of 113.5 square metres.

2.23 With regard to the M4(3) standard, a summarised definition is as follows:

“Wheelchair user dwellings category M4(3) must allow for reasonable provision for people to gain access to and use the dwelling and its facilities and include sufficient provisions to allow for simple adaptations of the dwelling to meet the needs of the occupants who use wheelchairs.”

2.24 With regard to electric vehicle charging points, these are identified on the layout drawing (namely P1076_10 Sheet 2 Rev ZE), and Members will note that an EV charging point is proposed for each house. With regard to the five flat blocks, in each case a communal EV ‘charging post’ is proposed.

2.25 With regard to photovoltaic panels, these are identified on drawing 1076_54 Sheet Number 1, and Members will note that panels are proposed on the rear roof slopes of 63 dwellings.

Page 16 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

2.26 With regard to tenure, a plan (’Phase 1 South Tenure Plan’) setting out where the affordable units would be provided, the unit types and the mix of affordable rent and affordable shared ownership has been provided. In particular, Members will note that a total of 35 affordable dwellings are proposed – a mix of 15 apartments and 20 houses. Of these, four of the houses would be provided for affordable shared ownership and the remainder for affordable rent. The delivery of the units would be secured under the Section 106 Agreement. The remainder of the units in this phase (222 in total) would be for private sale.

2.27 This phase has a total of 511 car parking space, including 62 visitor car parking spaces.

2.28 Full details of the hard and soft landscaping have been provided for Phase 1 South. The soft landscaping drawings (eight in total) show a detailed scheme of tree and other planting that includes, but is not limited to, street trees addressing the Spine Road (including a limited number of non-native Turkish hazels, which are favoured by KCC Highways for use in this type of location). Members will note that trees are now proposed in a number of the rear gardens. The level of detail is considered to be sufficient. With regard to hard landscaping, full details of the proposed surfacing to roads and paths (the latter would be surfaced in a mix of tarmac, block paving and self-binding gravel) have been provided, together with boundary treatment details, which are shown on the proposed enclosures layout and consist of a mix of walls, close boarded fencing, parkland metal estate railings and timber post and rail fencing.

2.29 As explained in the Design and Access Statement Addendum, the applicant has provided engineering drawings with the intention that all of the roads within Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South are built to adoptable standard and “…hence [they] will be seeking adoption by the Highways Authority [KCC Highways and Transportation].

2.30 Further to Paragraph 2.4 above, the outline elements include two schools, which as set out in the Planning Statement would be a six-form-entry secondary school (up to three storeys in height) and a two- form-entry the primary school (up to two storeys in height). The schools would be located immediately to the south of Bramblefield Lane and to the west of the Kemsley Halt railway station. The Concept Masterplan (P1076_18Q) shows the intended configuration for the whole site and connections to adjacent land, and this obviously includes an illustrative layout for this part of the site. The application is supported by various documents that explain why this position was chosen for the schools, rather than them being located elsewhere within the wider site, and this issue is discussed in the ‘appraisal’ section below.

2.31 Members will note that vehicular access to both schools would be from the proposed Spine Road (and not from a secondary vehicular access from Grovehurst Road as initially envisaged); a pedestrian and cycle access will be provided from Grovehurst Road.

2.32 With regard to the Local Centre, and further to Paragraph 2.4 above, the Concept Masterplan, which is illustrative only, shows this located just to the west of the proposed primary school, and accessed from the Spine Road. The 2019 Design & Access Statement Addendum includes an indicative ground floor plan and a corresponding street- scene drawing showing commercial units at ground floor level and apartments above. Page 29 of the document provides clarification and a justification for the approach being

Page 17 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

proposed. Among other things, it suggests that ‘retail, commercial or community activity’ could be provided at ground floor level and states that:

“…together with the adjacent school site [it] would act as a focus for activity and social interaction within the development.”

2.32.1 Members will also note that the Design & Access Statement Addendum (2019) suggests that:

“Given the proximity of the town centre, other local centres and other convenience shopping opportunities, it is considered to be commercially unfeasible to create a new local centre accommodating a particularly large amount of retail or commercial floorspace as part of this development.”

2.32.2 The document goes on to suggest that approximately 1200 square metres (or approximately 12,500 square feet) of retail / commercial could potentially be supported, and this could comprise, for example, a mini-supermarket (of approximately 230 square metres / circa 2,500 square feet) “…as well as some smaller units allowing for other retail uses such as hairdressers and takeaways.”

2.33 With regard to the acoustic bund, as well as running through Phase 1 North (which is covered above) it will run along the western side of the outline part of the application site – for a distance of approximately 680 metres – and Members will note that the details provided to date are illustrative. The details will be agreed in due course using a condition included below. The applicant has commented as follows:

“I can confirm that the total area occupied by the bund [including where it runs through Phase 1 North] will be approximately 3.4ha out of 20.15ha green infrastructure provided within the entire site. It is important to flag that this is an estimate, the bund has not been fully designed so we cannot confirm absolutely the area accommodated.

The acoustic fence will be set in from the application boundary; this is necessary to allow us to construct the bund wholly within our land. The position of the fence will depended upon the detailed design of the bund, but based upon the sections we have estimated approximately 2ha of land will sit outside of the accessible area (albeit this land will be planted up for ecology purposes and will provide an important ecology function as previously explained).”

2.34 This application is for an Environmental Impact Assessment development and is therefore accompanied by an Environmental Statement. The application has, among other things, been determined in accordance with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.

2.35 The key supporting documents are as follows:

• Planning Statement (April 2018);

• Planning Statement Addendum (December 2019);

• Environmental Statement (April 2018) – this gives a very detailed assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the development and includes chapters covering ‘noise and vibration, ‘air quality’ and ‘landscape and visual effects’;

Page 18 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• Environmental Statement, Non-Technical Summary (April 2018);

• Environmental Statement Addendum (February 2019);

• Technical Note – Noise (Train Noise Assessment)(October 2020);

• Design and Access Statement (April 2018);

• Design and Access Statement Addendum (February 2019);

• Design and Access Statement Addendum (September 2020);

• Habitat Regulations Screening Report (January 2018);

• Ecological Enhancement and Management Plan (September 2018);

• Landscape and Ecological Management Plan – Framework (October 2020);

• Arboricultural Survey Impact Assessment & Preliminary Method Statement (December 2020); • Development Framework (draft; April 2018);

• Transport Assessment (amended version received August 2018);

• Framework Travel Plan (April 2018);

• Letter dated 7 December 2020 and accompanying table and plans in respect of Biodiversity Net Gain;

• Flood Risk Assessment (updated version dated December 2020);

• Sustainability Statement (July 2020);

• Minerals Assessment (April 2018); and

• Statement of Community Involvement (April 2018).

3. SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-)

Site Area (ha) 64.5 64.5 0 Typical Ridge Height – two storey N/A 7.5 metres* N/A unit (m) Typical Ridge Height – 2.5 storey N/A 9.1 metres* N/A unit (m) Typical Ridge Height – three storey N/A 10.7 metres* N/A house (m)** Typical Ridge Height – three storey N/A 11.5 metres* N/A apartment (m)**

Page 19 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Parking Spaces (for Phase 1 North; 0 201 +201 91 dwellings) Parking Spaces (for Phase 1 South; 0 511 +511 257 dwellings) No. of Residential Units 0 1200 1200 No. of Affordable Units 0 35 35

*This is to give Members an indication of heights, and it should be noted that there is some difference depending on the particular house type in question. ** Only proposed in Phase 1 South.

4. PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

4.1 There are no listed buildings within the site. The Grade II listed Bramblefield Farmhouse is adjoining the site, facing Phase 1 North and with the schools site behind it (to the south). There are two Grade II listed buildings close to Quinton Road, but they are to the west of the application site and unlikely to be significantly affected by it. Great Grovehurst Farmhouse, also Grade II, is located on land just to the east of Grovehurst Road, though built development is not proposed in the vicinity of it.

4.2 None of the application site is located in a Conservation Area (CA), nor is any of the site close to the boundary of a CA or likely to affect the setting of one.

4.3 There are no TPO trees on the site.

4.4 The site is not located close to any Air Quality Management Areas, though Members will note that two have been designated in Sittingbourne: at St Paul’s Street and on the A2 to the east of the Town Centre. A further AQMA has recently been designated at Keycol Hill, on the A2 just to the east of Sittingbourne.

4.5 The application site is located predominantly in Flood Zone 1, where the risk of flooding is considered to be low. A small part of the site, along the central ditch and towards the eastern site boundary, falls within Flood Zone 3, where the risk of flooding is considered to be high.

4.6 A High Pressure Gas Pipe runs under the centre of the site from the vicinity of Volante Drive / Attlee Way to the east to Howt Green to the west.

4.7 The Important Countryside Gap between Sittingbourne and Iwade includes a narrow strip along the western side of the application site. This issue is dealt with in the appraisal section below.

5. PLANNING POLICY

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

5.1 The following Paragraphs of the NPPF are considered to be relevant: 7 (achieving sustainable development); 8 (over-arching sustainability objectives); 10 (the presumption in favour of sustainable development); 11 (decision taking when local policies most important for determining the application are out of date); 12 (the status of the development plan in decision making); 34 (developer contributions); 38 (the approach to

Page 20 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

decision making in a positive and creative way); 48 (weight to be given to emerging Local Plans); 54-56 (use of planning conditions and Planning Obligations); 59 (supporting the Government’s objective of significantly boosting housing); 61 (housing mix); 62/64 (affordable housing); 67 (identifying land for homes); 73 (maintaining a supply of housing sites); 91 (promoting healthy / safe communities); 92 (providing social / recreational facilities); 96 (access to high quality open space); 102 (transport); 108 (consideration of transport issues in development proposals); 109 (that development should only be refused if highway impacts would be severe); 110 (priority to pedestrians, cyclists and access to public transport within developments); 111 (travel plan requirements); 112 (need for high quality communications); 117 (making effective use of land); 122 (achieving appropriate densities); 124 (achieving well designed places); 127 (design criteria for developments); 128 (consideration of design quality between applicants, the local planning authority and local community); 129 ( access to / use of tools and processes for assessing and improving design); 130 (refusal of poor design), 149 to 154 (planning for climate change); 155 to 165 (planning and flood risk); 163 (flooding / drainage); 165 (sustainable drainage systems); 172 (protecting / enhancing valued landscapes) preventing new / existing development from unacceptable risks from pollution / air quality); 174-177 (protecting habitats and biodiversity, including Special Protection Areas / Ramsar sites); 178 (land suitability and risks from contamination); 180 (protection from noise / light pollution), 181 (air pollution, including AQMAs); 203 (making best use of minerals); and 212 -213 (the status of the NPPF in relation to development plans).

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

5.2 The following categories of the NPPG are relevant: Appropriate Assessment; Air Quality; Design; Determining a planning application; Flood Risk; Housing Supply and Delivery; Natural Environment; Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities, Public Rights of Way and Local Green Space; Planning Obligations; and Use of Planning Conditions.

5.3 In September 2019, the Government published its ‘National Design Guide’, which sets out guidance for planning practice on how to achieve ‘beautiful, enduring and successful places’, and is intended to be a tool to assist in achieving the objectives for high-quality design that are enshrined in the NPPF. Among other things, the document sets out ten characteristics for well-designed places (see paragraph 36), and the intention is that the document will, among other things, assist (see paragraph 11) “local authority planning officers, who…assess the quality of planning applications; and councillors, who make planning decisions…”

5.4 The Swale Borough Local Plan (Bearing Fruits 2031) (adopted July 2017) includes the following policies that are relevant to this development:

ST1 (Delivering sustainable development in Swale); ST2 (development targets for jobs and homes); ST3 (The Swale settlement strategy); ST4 (Meeting the Local Plan development targets); ST5 (The Sittingbourne Area Strategy); CP2 (promoting sustainable development); CP3 (Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes); CP4 (Requiring good design); CP5 (Health and wellbeing); CP6 (Community facilities and services to meet local needs); CP7 (Green infrastructure); DM1 (Town Centres); DM6 (Managing Transport Demand); DM7 (Vehicle parking); DM8 (Affordable Housing); DM14 (General development criteria); DM17 (Open space, sports and recreation provision);

Page 21 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

DM19 (Sustainable design and construction); DM21 (Water, flooding and drainage); DM24 (conserving and enhancing valued landscapes); DM25 (Important Countryside Gaps); DM28 (Biodiversity and geological conservation); DM29 (Woodlands, trees and hedges); DM31 (Agricultural land) and DM32 (Development involving listed buildings)

5.4.1 With regard to Policy DM19, Members note in respect of the non-residential buildings that are proposed that, at Paragraph (3), it states:

“All new non-residential buildings over 1000 square metres gross floor area should aim to achieve the BREEAM “Very Good” standard or equivalent as a minimum.”

5.4.2 Policy MU 1 of the Local Plan allocates approximately 75 hectares of land for a mix uses including a minimum of 1500 dwellings and reads as follows:

“Land at north-west Sittingbourne

Planning permission will be granted for mixed uses on land at North West Sittingbourne, as shown on the Proposals Map and will comprise a minimum of 1,500 dwellings, community facilities and structural landscaping and open space adjacent the A249. Development proposals will:

1. Be in accordance with a Masterplan/Development brief prepared by the landowners/developers involved in the delivery of the allocation, in consultation with the Borough Council and which reflects the requirements of this policy;

2. Be in accordance with Policy CP 4 and in particular, achieve an integrated landscape strategy to provide a minimum of 22 ha natural and semi-natural greenspace and other open space as a continuous buffer along the A249 that will form part of the important local countryside gap between Sittingbourne and Bobbing/Iwade in accordance with Policy DM 25 and Policy A 17 for Iwade, as well as contributing toward an appropriate link between the two via Bramblefield Lane/old Sheppey Way. This area will link to a network of green spaces and corridors throughout the allocation to achieve open space provision;

3. Ensure that, through both on and off site measures, any significant adverse impacts on European sites through recreational pressure will be mitigated in accordance with Policies CP 7 and DM 28, including a financial contribution towards the Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy;

4. Provide on-site flood mitigation measures;

5. Integrate heritage assets, having regard to their setting;

6. Be accompanied by a Health Impact Assessment in accordance with Policy CP 5;

7. Be supported by a Transport Assessment and access strategy in the Masterplan /development brief to determine the need and timing for improvements to the transport network and phasing of development and address the following: a. The scale, nature and timing of interim improvements at Grovehurst Road/A249 junction and if necessary at the Bobbing/A249 junction; b. Identification of vehicular access points from Quinton Road and Grovehurst Road and mitigation of traffic impacts on the local road network and existing neighbourhoods by defining an appropriate quantum of development relative to these access points;

Page 22 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

c. The timing of any necessary off-site highway improvements relative to the phasing of development; d. Identification of improvements to the public transport network between the site and Sittingbourne; e. Encouragement of increased rail use from Kemsley Halt through enhancement of the facilities there and public pedestrian and cycle links; f. Secure safe and attractive pedestrian and cycle links within the development and to the adjacent network including links to Iwade over the A249; g. Have regard to the availability of land to the north of Swale Way already safeguarded for the remodelling of the A249/Grovehurst Road junction and should the mitigation design require it, within any other relevant allocation.

8. Achieve a mix of housing in accordance with Policy CP 3, including provision for affordable housing in accordance with Policy DM 8;

9. Achieve suitable means of sustainable energy production and carbon reduction measures compliant with Policies DM 19 and DM 20;

10. Secure new primary and secondary schools on site, with dual public/school use facilities (including a land reservation for its provision), to include land for artificial playing pitches; and

11. Provide appropriate community facilities and other infrastructure within the site to meet the needs of future residents, including those within the Local Plan Implementation and Delivery Schedule, in particular those arising from primary health care, libraries and community, learning and skills services.”

The Policy is accompanied by supporting text. Members will note that Paragraph 6.6.14 refers to “…a combined site of a minimum of ten hectares…” for the provision of the primary and secondary schools.

Members will also note that the supporting text suggests that “some 1300 dwellings are envisaged” on land north of Quinton Road, which extends northwards as far as Bramblefield Lane. It also suggests that a ‘…minimum of 80 dwellings are envisaged…” on land between Bramblefield Land and Grovehurst Road.

Policy MU1 is also accompanied by a proposals map, which is included below:

Page 23 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

5.5 The consultation for the ‘Local Plan Review Pre-submission Draft’ (LPR) commenced on 8th February and will run until 22nd March 2021.

Page 24 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

5.5.1 In effect, and given that this consultation exercise is on-going, there is very limited weight that can be given to the LPR, because the extent and nature of any objections (or whether any objections are made by Statutory Consultees) to policies and allocations is not yet known. This will probably not become clear until late Spring/early Summer 2021.

5.6 The Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan 2013 – 2030 (KM&WLP)’ - Policy DM 7: Safeguarding Mineral Resources and Policy CSM 5 (Land-won Mineral Safeguarding) should be noted.

5.7 The Council has adopted Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) on the following:

5.7.1 ‘Swale Landscape Character and Biodiversity Appraisal SPD’ (SLCBA) (adopted September 2011) (the site falls within the ‘Iwade Arable Farmlands’ character area, which is considered to be in ‘poor condition and of moderate sensitivity’.

5.7.2 SPD ‘Developer Contributions’ (November 2009), which sets out the Council’s key expectations in respect of developer contributions to be secured when planning permission is granted for, among other things, housing developments of 10 or more dwellings.

5.7.3 ‘Parking Standards’ SPD (adopted May 2020):

5.7.3. With regard to the level of car parking provision required for the housing proposed, like KCC Highways and Transportation (see Paragraph 7.21 below), I consider ‘suburban’ to the applicable standard. Members will note that the SPD recommends (as the guidance is intended to be flexible, rather than prescriptive) the following for suburban areas:

1 & 2 bed flats – 1 space per dwelling 1 & 2 bed houses – 1 to 2 spaces per dwelling 3 bed houses – 2 to 3 spaces per dwelling 4+ bed houses – 3+ spaces per dwelling Visitor parking – 0.2 spaces per dwelling

5.7.3.2 With regard to the level of car parking that is proposed for the two schools proposed and the Local Centre, Members will note the guidance at Appendix D of the SPD. With regard to schools, 1 space per staff member plus an additional 10% for visitors is recommended. With regard to the Local Centre, I note that the mix of uses that will ultimately be provided within the Local Centre is not known at this stage because the application is in outline with these details reserved for future consideration under a separate reserved matters application. As such the relevant guidance in Appendix D will need to be applied at the reserved matters stage, rather than needing to be considered as part of this application.

5.7.3.3 The SPD also deals with electric vehicle charging points and states, at paragraph 102, that:

“It is vital that new developments provide the necessary infrastructure to cater for the future demand from ULEVs [ultra-low emission vehicles], by incorporating electric vehicle charging points into parking design as well as ensuring that the necessary power supply is provided to support the infrastructure implemented.”

5.7.3.4 The SPD also gives advice on the layout and design of car parking areas and the appropriate ways to incorporate trees, other landscaping and SUDS into the design of car parking areas.

Page 25 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

5.7.3.5 The documents provides guidance in respect of the car parking for non-residential development, including for schools (paragraphs 93 to 96) and for mixed use developments, which is applicable to the proposed Local Centre (see paragraphs 85 to 88).

5.8 The Council has adopted ‘Building For Life 12’ as a technical document. This is a useful tool to assess the base-level quality of developments.

5.9 ‘Guidance for complying with the climate change planning condition to reduce operational carbon of new dwellings in Swale by 50%’ was published in June 2020.

5.10 The ‘Air Quality and Planning - Technical Guidance (July 2019)’

5.10.1 Among other things, it is noted that the guidance – which has not been adopted as an SPD - suggests the following as standard mitigation for new dwellings: • All gas-fired boilers to meet a minimum standard of <40mgNOx/kWh; and • 1 Electric Vehicle charging point (best technology available at the time of planning approval) per dwelling with dedicated parking or 1 charging point per 10 spaces (unallocated parking).

6. LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 An initial consultation with 394 local addresses (together with the positing of four site notices) and four subsequent rounds of consultation following receipt of amended details have generated a total of 18 responses. These are summarised as follows:

1st Consultation

6.2 Five responses were received and generally the concerns raised relate to Phase 1 North, rather than the development as a whole. The comments are summarised as follows:

• Possible harmful impact on setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse [Grade II listed], particularly if the schools are built-out as shown on the indicative layout with sport pitches on the boundary with this property; • Harm to residential amenity from proposed schools, particularly associated with sports pitches; • Could the sports pitches be located elsewhere and noise attenuation provided; • Existing trees (including mature oak trees) should be preserved, together with existing hedges; • Could a mini-roundabout be provided at the junction of Bramblefield Lane and Grovehurst Road; • Access to schools could cause road safety issues; • Existing infrastructure is inadequate to cope with this development – reference is made to road capacity, doctors and dentists; • Dwellings on Bramblefield Lane will be overshadowed and over-looked; • Visual appearance and density of dwellings on Phase 1 North will be detrimental to amenity of Bramblefield Lane dwellings; • Bramblefield Lane may become a through road; • New dwellings should not have a vehicular connection to Bramblefield Lane, and appropriate boundary treatment should be provided so that vehicles cannot access the existing road from Phase 1 North; • Parking capacity on Bramblefield Lane will be reduced if Phase 1 North does not have adequate car parking (including for visitors); • Best and Most Versatile farmland will be lost;

Page 26 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• Existing dwellings will be de-valued; • Existing dwellings will be exposed to noise and disturbance from the development; • Three-storey dwellings should not be sited on plots (specific reference is made to 320, 321 and 322) backing on to existing dwellings on Bramblefield Lane (in particular, Numbers 40 to 46 inclusive); specific reference is drawn to the Lumley house types, which has rooms in the roof-space providing accommodation on a 3rd level; • Internal roadways may not be wide enough; • The development will be constructed over more than a decade causing disturbance to existing residents; • Brownfield sites should be re-developed in preference to developing sites such as this; • What works are to be carried out to Grovehurst Road?

2nd Consultation

6.3 Four responses were received, and these generally re-state concerns as set out in response to the 1st consultation. Additional points were raised as follows:

• Bramblefield Lane will be used as a parking area by people dropping off children for the proposed schools;

• Use of the school sport pitches will detract from residential amenity, and not just during school operating hours;

• Vehicular access to the schools from Grovehurst Road would cause road safety and amenity issues [this has now been deleted from the proposed development];

• New medical facilities should be provided; otherwise existing doctors’ surgeries will “be inundated with new patients”;

• Density of development would be too high and dwellings “…squashed together…”; and

• There should not be a vehicular access from Quinton Road, because traffic will then access the B2006 [Staplehurst Road] and the A249 from the development, causing various traffic problems and noise disturbance, including on Sonora Way and Quinton Road.

3rd Consultation

6.4 Five responses were received and the comments are generally as set out in the summaries above, though new points were made as follows:

• The A249, the B2005 [Grovehurst Road] and other local roads will not be able to accommodate the additional traffic, causing a danger to road users;

• Additional screening [compared to that shown on the illustrative layout] is required between rear gardens to properties on Bramblefield Lane and the school site;

• The proposed level of development is too high;

• Three-storey dwellings are still proposed – on re-numbered plots 324, 325 and 326;

• Visitor car parking provision has not been addressed; and

Page 27 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• LPA should ensure developments are “…not unreasonably and unnecessarily detrimental…”

4th Consultation

6.5 Three responses were received, including one with a petition attached (signed by 15 people). The comments are generally as set out in the summaries above, though new points were made as follows:

• Development should be reviewed with “…a holistic awareness of the wider impacts of this…on the communities within Swale…”;

• Concern expressed about the safety of the existing PROW crossing linking the site to Middletune Avenue;

• Application should be refused as it leaves many questions unanswered;

• Post Brexit, farmland may be needed more than ever; as such, application should not be determined until “…at least 24 months after Brexit.”;

• The proposed housing may be needed;

• Adverse impact on M2 Junction 5;

• Heavy Goods Vehicles associated with building the development will add to local traffic congestion;

• Vibration impacts should be monitored if the development is approved;

• Local Accident and Emergency facilities may not have sufficient capacity and this development would add to the issues arising;

• Biodiversity on site may be adversely affected;

• Developers should sign up to Considerate Constructors Scheme;

• Concerns is expressed about potential flooding impacts, if development reduces the site’s surface water drainage capacity; and

• Foul drainage and drinking water infrastructure should be assessed to ensure infrastructure is sufficient.

5th Consultation

6.6 In response to this round of consultation one responses was received and the new issues raised are summarised as follows:

• Surface water should be attenuated to the rate required by the Lower Medway Internal Drainage Board;

• How will Grovehurst Road and Hurst Lane [a cul-de-sac linked to the eastern side of Grovehurst Road] residents access the site?

Page 28 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• Additional traffic management may be required for residents of Grovehurst Road;

• Additional traffic will cause light pollution; and

• Will covenants on existing properties be removed as a result of this development?

6.7.1 The Sittingbourne Society have twice commented on this application. Their initial response is summarised as follows:

• Concern is expressed about the proposed development, though they accept that the site is “…as acceptable as any in the area for residential development…”;

• Is foul drainage capacity adequate?

• Concern expressed about potential pollution of Milton Creek;

• Development should be resisted until it can be demonstrated that there is sufficient local foul drainage capacity;

• Concern is expressed off-site highway impacts and potential adverse air quality impacts;

• The proposed affordable housing provision is “very low”;

• Existing healthcare, school and water supply infrastructure may not have capacity to serve this development, and this development should be resisted unless the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that there is sufficient infrastructure capacity.

6.7.2 The Society subsequently commented as follows, reiterating their objection:

“The proposed amendments outlined in your latest letter give us no reason to change our views on the undesirability of this major development and we hope the Council will resolve to refuse it.”

6.8 Swale Footpaths Group raise no objection, but state that the application should be clear about the extent of any footpaths that are to be diverted.

Ward Councillor comments

6.9 The Meads (Cllr Hunt);

Cllr Hunt has provided various detailed responses to consultation on this application and has liaised directly with the applicant from time to time in order to secure positive amendments to the layout. His comments on the current version of the application can be summarised as follows:

• Concerned about noise from train horns from the adjacent railway line; is an updated Noise Assessment required and can mitigation (for example additional planting or an acoustic fence) be incorporated in the scheme;

• Path surfacing needs to be carefully considered so that it corresponds with what is proposed for the Redrow development and in order to ensure it is suitable for cyclists;

Page 29 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• Concerned about the management of some areas of open space / landscaping that may not be adopted by KCC Highways – such areas may end up not being well managed in the future;

• Generally the proposed off-site pedestrian / cycle routes are welcomed, though concerns are raised about the detail in respect of the Vicarage Road/Quinton Road bridge;

• Lighting on the proposed roads is welcomed, but need to ensure that cycle / footpaths are also lit to allow safe use by pedestrians and cyclists;

• The contemporary design approach for Phase 1 South is welcomed and suggests it is officers to evaluate the detail, including how the design envisaged for Phase 1 South will sit alongside that proposed for other parts of the development;

• The adoption of Swale Parking Standards is noted and presumably the development will need to comply with them; and

• Previous comments in respect of the traffic implications, the design of the linear park and the management of construction traffic (particularly in terms of implications for adjacent residential areas) are reiterated. [These are summarised below].

• Traffic implications – concerned is expressed about the implications of the development for existing roads in the surrounding area (notably Quinton Road and Sonora Way); off-site highway mitigation may not be adequate and consideration should be given to the needs of all road users, with appropriate pedestrian / cycle crossings incorporated;

• Linear park – this needs to be delivered (including the soft landscaping and the cycle / pedestrian routes) in a timely manner so that residents can benefit from it as soon as possible.

• Construction traffic – this is a significant concern given that construction vehicles may access the site through residential areas such as The Meads and via Sheppey Way, which runs past the Bobbing Primary School. A haul road should be built through the site at the outset so that construction can access all parts of the site from the north (via Grovehurst Road).

6.10 Kemsley (Cllrs Dendor and Carnell):

Cllr Dendor has commented on the design of Phase 1 North and the scheme has been amended to address his comments, particularly in respect of the 2.5 storey dwellings that had previously been proposed in locations adjoining existing dwellings on the northern side of Bramblefield Lane. As noted above (see Paragraph 2.10), the Phase 1 North layout has been amended with respect to 2.5 storey dwellings so that none are proposed backing directly on to existing dwellings.

Cllr Dendor has also provided input in respect of the developer contributions that are sought in for the Kemsley Village Hall. This issue is discussed in the ‘appraisal’ section below.

Page 30 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

6.11 Bobbing, Iwade and Lower Halstow (Cllrs Clark and Woodford):

No written comments on the application have been received.

6.12 Milton Regis (Cllrs Winkless and Davey; Members will note that this ward adjoins the application site on the eastern side of the railway running along the site’s eastern boundary):

Generally they have not commented on the planning merits of the proposed development, but have requested that consideration be given to providing a road connection within the new housing development so that the existing sub-station compound adjoining the application site can be accessed from the proposed development, rather than vehicles crossing the railway line at the existing level crossing. Condition (25A) below is proposed to address this.

7. CONSULTATIONS

7.1 The Environment Agency raise no objection subject to conditions in respect of foul drainage details being agreed, infiltration of surface water only being with agreement of the Local Planning Authority, piling details to be agreed with LPA if penetrative methods are to be used, and to deal with the scenario contamination not previously identified.

7.2 The Environmental Protection Team Leader raises no objection subject to conditions and inclusion of appropriate s106 clauses (see Paragraph 9.16.1 below) having carefully considered the implications of the development for, in particular, air quality, noise and ground contamination.

7.2.1 Members will note, in particular:

“Air Quality Mitigation Damage Cost Calculation (for phase 1)

The total emission cost for phase 1 is worked out pro-rata as £185,729 i.e. as 28% of the total emission cost for the whole scheme (£649,781)

I am satisfied with the calculation and the amount of money which results from it. However, from my EH perspective not all of this money is relevant and therefore should not be included in the scheme under this heading. I would agree as being relevant all the electric vehicle charging points, low NOx boilers, travel plan and welcome pack. This amounts to a sum of £360,154, still well in excess of the total emission cost for phase 1.

Secure cycle storage is helpful but the figure quoted seems extremely large without a suitable explanation where the figure comes from and landscaping is not relevant here, though the reference to species that have a mitigation effect on air pollution is to be welcomed and could be included in the landscaping section of the proposal.

Noise

I was satisfied with the submission in the relevant chapter of the Environmental Statement and stated so in my memo to you at the time, but have been now been made aware of the specific measure for mitigating the development from traffic noise, and in particular those properties who are closest to the A249, i.e. the proposed combination of earth bund and fence on top.

Page 31 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

There is a description in the Planning Statement of what is intended, though it is somewhat vague. It describes the measure as a 3 metre high bund with a 1.8 metre ‘fence’. I do not disagree with this measure as being the best available for this scenario; the closest properties will derive most benefit. It is not clear whether the fence is a standard or acoustic fence – the latter being preferable to add extra noise attenuation.

I was concerned that the statement still refers to PPG 24 noise exposure categories, though they were removed in 2012.

I think therefore it would be appropriate to suggest the following condition for (traffic) noise, particularly for the closest properties: I have used this condition previously in similar circumstances.”

With regard to the damage cost calculation for air quality mitigation, I have received clarification from the applicant and this is set out in the appraisal section below.

With regard to the latter point, Members will note I have included conditions below to deal with this, both for the detailed phase and in respect of the outline areas.

With regard to land contamination, standard conditions are requested and I have included these below.

With regard to noise from train horns and further to the Technical Note on Noise (October 2020) prepared specifically to address this, the Environmental Protection Team Leader comments as follows:

“The Technical Note …has confirmed the need to consider mitigation measures on this development as a result of train horn noise. A higher specification of window glazing of habitable rooms that overlook the railway lines is recommended. This is coupled with a requirement for an alternative form of ventilation and/or cooling so that occupants can retain access to fresh air and retain thermal comfort without compromising their noise climate with windows closed. The assessment has shown that providing the mitigation measures recommended are implemented, the noise levels within the proposed properties should meet the appropriate internal noise level criteria required.”

7.3 Southern Water Services have responded to the consultation on the most recent round of amendments, and to previous consultations, and Members will note the following:

“The wastewater discharged from the proposed development will be drained to Southern Water’s Sittingbourne Wastewater Treatment Works. The works currently does not have the capacity to accommodate flows from the proposed development. Where development has been identified and allocated for future development by the Local Planning Authority, Southern Water will attempt to ensure capacity is available to serve these developments. Should planning approval be granted then Southern Water recognises its obligations under the new charging regime to provide capacity in the existing sewerage system to accommodate the needs of the proposed development. Any such network reinforcement will be part funded through the New Infrastructure Charge with the remainder funded through Southern Water’s Capital Works programme. [Rather than being matters to be dealt with as part of any planning approval that the Local Planning Authority may grant.]

Southern Water and the Developer will need to work together in order to review if the

Page 32 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

delivery of our network reinforcement aligns with the proposed occupation of the development, as it will take time to design and deliver any such reinforcement. It may be possible for some initial dwellings to connect, pending network reinforcement. Southern Water will review and advise on this following consideration of the development program and the extent of network reinforcement required.

In conclusion, they raise no objection subject to the imposition of suitable conditions. I have included conditions and informatives below to deal with the matters raised.

7.4 KCC Flood and Water Management raise no objection, and an extract from their most recent response includes the following:

“We provided a consultation response to this application on 15 June 2018 and recommended specific conditions to be considered on any approval.

Further drainage information has subsequently been provide in a Drainage Strategy Overview Drawing (GTA Civils, November 2019) which shows discharges locations per catchment with stated discharge rates. This drawing is an update of the Drainage Strategy (GTA Civils, Drawing 5824/1014) included within the Flood Risk Assessment originally submitted for this application. Discharge rates have varied slightly but are generally acceptable.

These discharge rates are tied to specific assumptions in relation to impermeable areas and greenfield runoff rates which are not specified on this current version of the drawing. Given the lack of specificity on the drawing, QBAR rates for the calculation of discharge rates shall be confirmed and agreed at detailed design but should not fundamentally change developed discharge rates. This is to ensure the impermeable areas confirmed with detailed layout approvals then support the appropriate discharge rates.

We would recommend approval of this application with appropriate conditions as specified in our response on 15 June 2018. These conditions have been slightly modified since 2018.”

Members will note that KCC Flood and Water Management were consulted on the amended Flood Risk Assessment and that they raise no objection subject to the imposition of the conditions initially requested, which are included below.

7.5 The Lower Medway Internal Drainage Board raise no objection to the application, and comment as follows: “The LMIDB will be interested in this application because the surface water from the two proposed sites will all drain into a main ditch that eventually passes under the railway line and into an IDB adopted watercourse. It is therefore essential that the surface water from the site is attenuated to at least 7 litres/sec/hectare for the 1:100yr storm (with an extra 40% storage for climate change). In this instance KCC will be the land drainage authority for consenting to private ditches but the Board will try and ensure its interests are taken into account.”

7.5.1 The LMIDB were consulted on the updated Flood Risk Assessment, but no response was received.

7.6 The Planning Casework Unit have no comments to make on the content of the Environmental Statement submitted in support of the application.

Page 33 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

7.7 Network Rail (NR) have submitted, following input from the train operating company, Southeastern Railways, costings for improvements to the Kemsley Halt to be funded under the Section 106 agreement, in the form of a payment of £60,000. In the event that planning permission is granted, they look forward in due course to working will all relevant parties to agree how the works will be delivered.

7.7.1 With regard to the Vicarage and Foxgrove level crossing - which as set out above is the point where PROW ZU6 crosses the railway line and connects to the existing housing to the east of the application site (Middletune Avenue) – Network Rail (NR) are raising no objection to the application on the following basis:

• The developer has agreed to fund NR to undertake a technical assessment of the two mitigation options; diversion on the ground (by the provision of Miniature Stop Lights, which provide a visual and audible warning that a train is approaching) or via a footbridge over the railway; • Once the technical assessment has been completed and the preferred mitigation has been identified, the developer has agreed to fund the delivery of this option which includes the costs associated with closing the crossing. The mitigation works will then be undertaken by NR; • The preferred option and the cost for delivery shall be identified by NR prior to the commencement of Phase 1 South; and • The funds shall be secured via the S106 and shall be paid prior to the 257th occupation on Phase 1 South.

7.7.2 In an additional response, further comments were provided as follows:

• £1,000,000 figure for the bridge suggested could turn out to be an underestimate and recently built footbridges have cost more, up to £1.25 million in one instance; • Although NR would carry out a Diversity Impact Assessment before forming a view, they are ‘likely to be looking at a stepped footbridge’ as a ramped alternative would be likely to cost £2,000,000 or more; • Although NR would look to deliver the bridge as early as possible, ‘we do not have a planned delivery date at this stage’; • Maintenance of the bridge (including lighting and surfacing) should be at the developer’s expense; • With regard to improvements to Kemsley Halt, reference is made to costings provided by Southeastern Railways (noting preferred option would be circa £58,000); and • NR support the principle of a pedestrian and cycle connection to the Kemsley Halt.

7.8 Southeastern Railways raise no objection to the application and welcome the payment of a developer contribution to fund improvements to the Kemsley Halt.

They also state, with respect to the pedestrian / cycle link to the station: “we can confirm that we have discussed this with NR [Network Rail] and also your team and are in support of the new foot path/cycle way to the station that joins onto the existing footpath accessing the platform.”

7.9 Kent Community Rail Partnership (hosted by Sustrans) raise no objection and their comments are summarised as follows:

• National Cycle Network (NCN1): does the proposed development offer any improvements to this route? • Cycle / pedestrian routes not clear from the Transport Assessment;

Page 34 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• Existing railway line introduces severance between new community and existing ones [on east side of it] and will restrict access to new facilities for existing residents; • There is an opportunity to improve pedestrian access across railway line, though Network Rail are unlikely to accept increased use of existing crossings; • A grade separated crossing for pedestrians and cyclists is recommended - NCN1 could be routed via this, taking it away from Grovehurst Road; and • A connection directly between the development at Kemsley Halt should be a condition of this permission, not a “possible future connection to Kemsley Halt” as suggested by the Masterplan.

7.10 The Kent County Council Public Rights of Way Officer has participated in detailed discussions with officers and the applicant and now raises no objection subject to the imposition of two planning conditions (included below) and the payment of five developer contributions (itemised in the Paragraph 9.16.1 below, and amounting to a total of £119,615); and their latest consultation response includes the following:

“Following our previous comments, the applicant has engaged with the PROW and Access Team and considered the potential impacts of the development on the PROW network. On balance, we have no objection to the proposal…”

7.10.1 A further response has been provided, which includes the following:

“From a PRoW perspective, I would make the following comments on the bridge proposal:

• We would most likely support the bridge proposal, as this would maintain connectivity for the public and remove the risks associated with the at-grade crossing; • Though ZU6 is currently recorded as a footpath, cyclists are likely to use this route. The bridge should therefore be ‘future proofed’ and designed to accommodate cycle use. This approach would avoid having to retrofit the structure for cyclists in the future; • Public Footpath ZU6 is currently enclosed by housing and curtilage on the south east side of the railway line. Having visited the site, there does not appear to be sufficient space available to accommodate a new bridge along the alignment of Footpath ZU6. The applicant/Network Rail may need to acquire land at this location for the bridge; • The legal alignment of Public Footpath ZU6 may need to be diverted, so that it passes along the new bridge crossing; and • Consideration would need to be given to the future maintenance of the bridge, as KCC are unlikely to adopt the bridge. If KCC were to adopt the bridge, we would seek a commuted sum to cover the future costs of maintaining and replacing the structure.”

7.11 KCC Minerals and Waste are concerned that parts of the proposed development would conflict with Paragraph 203 of the NPPF and Policy DM7 of the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan. This does not relate to Phase 1 North, which KCC acknowledge has been sterilised as a potential source of brick-earth due to material dumped from the construction of the adjacent A249 dual-carriageway.

With regard to the remainder of the site, it is stated that the application site does have a safeguarded mineral (brickearth) deposit and that this would be sterilised by the proposed development of the site.

Page 35 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

KCC conclude that:

“…it can be said that the Minerals Assessment is essentially flawed in that it draws arguably the wrong conclusions from the available evidence, and then compounds this by having no third party verification of the contentions that the material is uneconomic and cannot be extracted within acceptable timescales.”

In a subsequent response, following clarification from the applicant, it is noted that while ‘…It is for the local authority to determine the application as it sees fit on the evidence available…KCC suggest evidence hasn’t been provided to justify the development proceeding without the prior extraction of the brickearth. They conclude as follows:

“…though it is a matter of policy at both national and local scales that the principle of land-won mineral safeguarding can only be exempted if the evidence supports this conclusion. To allow non-mineral development to proceed on Mineral Safeguarding Areas without proper recourse to ensuring needles sterilisation does not occur could, it is considered, render the decision challengeable in law.”

7.12 Greenspaces Manager raises no objection to the proposed development and confirms that the Council would not take on the management of any of the open space or strategic landscaped areas.

In response to consultation in September 2020 on update management proposals for the open space and updated hard and soft landscaping proposals, he makes further comments as follows:

“Have read through the letter in relation to proposed open space management – While disappointing ultimately KWT [Kent Wildlife Trust] not undertaking management of country park areas, it does appear there is a continued relationship on the proposed committee. This will help to embed the biodiversity and particularly monitoring elements in the proposals and management. While not suggested in previous proposals, retaining a link for SBC and KCC into the management company may help to reduce fear of the company not performing, however if purely acting in an advisory role it is not clear what if any sanction is available, if it were failing. Generally feel the proposal is acceptable.

The amended plans appear to set out both the clear principals in the respective masterplans and full details within the respective planting plans. The planting plans include naturalised bulb planting where appropriate and certainly pick up on the secondary Neighbourhood Landscape Area typology in primarily being visual amenity, but with a secondary ecological function. Evident through the use of meadow seed mix in addition to naturalised bulbs and a wide range of both native and ornamental trees. Tree species appear to be appropriate to location within the scheme.”

With regard to formal sports provision, he comments as follows:

“The Council’s Playing Pitch Strategy identifies the need for proposed basic facilities and some pitch improvements to increase capacity at Kemsley Recreation Ground and pitch improvements at Milton Recreation Ground again to help increase capacity at peak times. In addition identified post Strategy, with potential changes to usage of both the existing ball court and changing pavilion at Milton Recreation Ground for multi sports in addition to football, the Council is looking to reconfigure and refurbish both…”

Page 36 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

A contribution of £593 per dwelling (a total of £711,600) has been requested towards playing pitch improvements at Milton Recreation Ground and Kemsley Recreation Ground. .”

7.13 Sport England advise that they “have no comments on the latest set of plans.

In addition, following further discussion I now understand that the proposed contribution is to assist specifically with formal sports provision; a figure of £711,600 has been secured, to be used at surrounding sports sites in order to carry out improvements as deemed appropriate by the Local Planning Authority (LPA). I understand that the LPA considers this an adequate contribution.

Sport England has no objections to this approach.”

7.14 NHS Kent and Medway Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) consider that the development will have a direct impact on the provision of services locally, but consider that this can be mitigated by the provision of a developer contribution to allow the provision of primary care in the vicinity of the site to be improved. Based on an average occupancy of 2.4 people per dwelling, they calculate that the 1200 dwellings proposed would require a developer contribution of £1,036,800. This could then be directed “towards refurbishment, reconfiguration and/or extension of Grovehurst Surgery [which adjoins the application site], Iwade Health Centre, Lakeside Medical Centre or The Meads Medical Practice.” The CCG request that the s106 agreement allows for the possibility that some or all of money be spent on surgeries other than four specifically identified.

The consultation response includes the following:

“During 2019 the CCG undertook discussions with general practices in Sittingbourne to review and refresh premises priorities to respond to population growth; the output of this is reflected in the GP Estates Strategy. There is currently limited capacity within existing general practice premises to accommodate the expected growth in Sittingbourne and therefore additional capacity will be required; this is expected to be achieved mainly through reconfiguration and expansion of existing premises.

The need from this specific development, along with other developments in the immediate area, will create population growth that we expect to impact the practices detailed above due to the current catchment areas of these practices. This will therefore need to be met through the creation of additional capacity at one or more of these practices to ensure there is space to support the increased patient registrations and additional workforce. The CCG will be taking forward more detailed discussions with Grovehurst Surgery, which is in the immediate vicinity of this development, to further explore options and understand what may be feasible on the existing site and timing of any expansion. We are therefore unable to provide details of a specific project but can confirm that the need for capacity in this area is identified as a priority and the intention is to use the contributions as set out above. Any premises plans will take into account the pooling of S106 contributions where appropriate.”

7.15 Bobbing Parish Council object to the application and comment as follows:

“At its meeting on the 7 July 2020, Bobbing Parish Council agreed that its objections, as lodged on the 4 April 2020 and 6 February 2020, still stand. In particular the Council is concerned to note that no action has been taken to prevent Sonora Way from being used as an access to major routes, i.e. the A249 and M2, which will cause distress to the residents living in this area.”

Page 37 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

7.15.1 They also state: “Relating to our concerns over the use of Sonora Way by traffic from this development using it as a short cut to the A249 and beyond. Due to issues with the T- junction of Sheppey Way/B2006/ traffic queues mainly due to access to and from the Bobbing Apple retail site, we would urge the Borough Council to use the opportunity (with S.106 money) to redesign this area and install a roundabout, which would improve traffic flow and encourage vehicles from the new development to use Quinton Road/Sheppey Way (past Bobbing School) and then exit onto the B2006. This will in turn reduce the amount of traffic using Sonora Way as a short cut.”

7.15.2 The Parish Council have also stated: “…that they have very real concerns over air quality in the region. They also pointed out that Highways England have stated that the A249 only has capacity for another 50 cars per day, hence HE blocking development along this corridor.”

7.15.3 Further comments have been made (which are dated 12/10/2020) as follows:

“Bobbing Parish Council requests that the Secondary School and Primary School are built at the beginning of the development and not at the end; with all the house building going in Swale and in particular this area, there is a shortage of school places (particularly Secondary School places) and the local schools are all full. Hence it is important that these schools are build in advance.

It is also important that other promised infrastructure comes forward at the beginning and not left until the end of the development, as so often happens.”

7. 16 Although none of the application site is located within their area, Iwade Parish Council have been consulted and their comments are as follows:

“Infrastructure; this should come first not last as always.

Schools; there is a distinct lack of school places in the area, the promised Secondary and Primary Schools should be built first so that those moving into the new homes can do so knowing that their children have a place in a School.

NHS has expressed concern regarding the lack of Doctors in the area and the difficulty it has in obtaining them.

Concern that the access/exit from the Grovehurst Road end of the development will impact on this main road and cause queues on the approach to the A249 roundabout.

Concern that this will add to the already congested A249 and M2, Junction 5.”

7.17 The Affordable Housing Manager has been involved in on-going discussions with the applicant, and having considered the amended proposals for Phase 1 South (see Paragraph 2.26 above) and, in the light of further clarification, raises no objection. The details are discussed in the ‘appraisal’ below and Members will also note that a dedicated affordable housing plan has been provided.

With regard to the other detailed area of the application, namely Phase 1 North, no objection is raised to this part of the site not containing any affordable dwellings.

With regard to the area for which outline approval is sought (852 dwellings in total), no objection is raised on the basis that 10% of the dwellings will be affordable units, the

Page 38 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

tenure split will be 90-10 in favour of affordable rent and the mix of units (dwelling sizes and types) will be proportionate to the mix of private dwellings in each phase.

7.18 The Climate Change Officer has considered both the initial submission and the Planning Statement Addendum and comments as follows:

“This is a complicated case and while I was happy with the application when submitted things have moved on both nationally and locally.

As you know our planning and local plan committees now have very ambitious targets for carbon reductions (particularly so since the election of a new administration in May 2019) – aspiring for 50% [reduction] over current Building Regulations in respect of minimising CO2 emissions, and asking for proof of why this is not attainable. A consultant and Building Control are working on some guidance for developers which we can point the applicant to. [Members will note Paragraph 5.9 above, and that the final version of the document was published in June 2020.]

The Future Homes Standard consultation has closed but the outcomes are as yet unpublished. One possible outcome is that LPAs will lose the power to create their own standards above Building Regulations. The developer has committed to achieving the 31% improvement which is one of the options in the Future Homes Standard. While this is not the 50% improvement being sought, it is far better than the 3% originally proposed and substantially better than on a neighbouring site – which although with a different developer (Redrow Homes have committed to exceeding the Building Regulations standard by 14%) is to all intents and purposes part on the same site and part of the same Local Plan allocation.

I understand this is being offered in respect of all 1200 dwellings proposed. However, for the outline we can use a condition that requires that before the 1st dwelling in the outline part of the development is occupied the applicant commits either to build the remaining dwellings to the 50% standard or to the Building Regulations standard at that time, whichever is higher.

We would expect homes to have water butts and composting bins.

With regard to the schools and the local centre (and any other commercial buildings) our current Local Plan requires a BREEAM standard of very good for buildings over 1000 square meters and good for those below this. Given that this is outline and the build some years away, the review of the Local Plan and the ambitions of the committee can we suggest the developer at least considers an excellent rating.”

In response to consultation on updated sustainability information in September 2020, further comments were submitted, which include the following:

“In their Sustainability and Energy Statement the applicants…state that should the Future Homes Standard be adopted before they start to build (either 20% or 31% reduced emissions over current building regs) then they will build to this standard.

I would like them to commit to at least the 31% and for 50% for latter stages of the development as this will go some way to meeting our 50% aspiration.

I can't find any references to BREEAM ratings for the school - this should be a minimum of "good" or "very good" depending on size.”

Members will note that conditions are included below to deal with these matters.

Page 39 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

7.19 British Transport Police initially raised concerns in respect of detailed aspects of the proposals as they relate to the railway line and the Kemsley Halt station, both of which adjoin the eastern side of the application site. In particular, the following points were raised:

(i) Vicarage Level Crossing (to railway line) should be closed or mitigation provided to minimise risk (following discussions with relevant parties); (ii) Upgrades to Kemsley Halt Station should be informed by input from Kent Police with the objective designing out opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour; (iii) Pedestrian routes to Kemsley Station should have ‘active frontages’ to encourage natural surveillance; (iv) The boundaries of Kemsley Station should be well defined; (v) Non-residential elements of the development should be located on the route to the Kemsley Station; and (vi) Childrens’ play areas should ideally be positioned away from the railway perimeter.

However, in the light of clarification from the applicant they now are happy with what is proposed. Although with regard to the PROW crossing of the railway line, they noted:

“Obviously still concerned around risk but do note the funding provision of the stop light and alternative footpaths.”

As set out below, Members will note that the applicant has subsequently agreed to pay a developer contribution that Network Rail consider should be sufficient to fund the delivery of an over-bridge for this PROW crossing. The arrangements for pedestrian and cycle access to Kemsley Halt are discussed in the appraisal below, together with the related issue of the appropriate siting within the wider site for the schools’ site.

7.20 Kent Police have provided a number of consultation responses in respect of this application and the applicant has made various changes to the detailed layout for Phase 1 South and Phase 1 North in order to minimise the opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour. As set out above, there has also been detailed engagement with British Transport Police in response to a request from Kent Police. With regard to Secure by Design, Kent Police strongly encourage the applicant to apply for the relevant accreditation. Members will also note that the latest update to the Design Access Statement (dated September 2020) addresses these issues on pages 32 and 35, and that Secure by Design is referred to in the supporting text to Local Plan policy CP4. Condition (26B) below will require that Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South are designed to accord with the principles of Secure by Design.

7.21 KCC Highways and Transportation have played a central role in the discussion with the applicant and have provided various written comments on the development. They now raise no objection subject to a set of conditions and the payment of various developer contributions, and their latest response includes the following:

“Parking

Cycle parking shed designs have been reviewed and are agreed to be of sufficient length and width to meet with standards. The latest drawings demonstrate cycle parking for those properties previously identified as being missing. As such it is agreed that cycle parking is provided in generally in accordance with policy requirements. It should be noted that properties 343 and 344 are omitting cycle parking, have no 0.5m

Page 40 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

service margin and insufficient space is available to reverse into their parking spaces. It is therefore recommended that these dwellings be set back by 1.5m.

[Members will note that the Phase 1 North layout has been amended to address this point.]

Single, twin and triple car port plans and elevations are agreed as suitable. These all include 2.9m entry width and sufficient length. An additional quadruple car port drawing has been submitted and reviewed; this also meets with the required SBC parking standards. A condition will be required to ensure that car ports cannot be adapted and retained for vehicle parking only. The latest drawings include the previously requested extension to the driveway spurs along the spine road to widths of 15m for the shared drive and 8m for the single drive. These amendments are welcomed and overcome our safety concerns that the on-street parking on the spine road would introduce. Parallel visitor parking bays have chamfered entries and are of 6m length in accordance with SBC standards.

The southern parcel has a total of 511 car parking spaces provided and is above the SBC parking standard minimum recommendation for suburban standards (483).

The northern parcel has a total of 201 car parking spaces provided and is slightly below the SBC parking standard minimum recommendation for suburban standards (211). However, as the application comes with a number of interventions designed to encourage sustainable transport and therefore is considered to be policy compliant.

Refuse tracking

Tracking [for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South] has been further reviewed and now demonstrate that collections can operate effectively.

Access to Schools

The requested change to clearly demonstrate that access for walking and cycling is provided within the Concept Masterplan is now shown. It has also been confirmed that the crossing of the Grovehurst Road will be a condition of the accompanying Great Grovehurst Farm application [reference 18/502372/EIOUT – pending application for 115 dwellings].

Grovehurst Road Site Access

Further details on the expected turning movements and capacity have been submitted and reviewed. The resultant modelling demonstrates that after inclusion of the school related traffic, the roundabout would still operate at 2031 with sufficient reserve capacity.

Quinton Road Site Access

The latest drawing for this junction arrangement numbered 27239_5504_021 REV G rectifies the issues raised within the Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and has been tracked as requested. The drawing is approved.

Page 41 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Lighting

The lighting and street tree plans 2535-SK-16, 17 & 18 have been reviewed and are agreed. In respect of the S278 drawings listed below we would wish to highlight that these drawings refer to ASD lighting which in the main will be acceptable for the residential roads. There are however sections of the spine road that would require higher levels of lighting and as such the main accesses an area surrounding the central square will need to be CU Phosco luminaires in accordance with our list of approved apparatus. The applicant should refer to the Institute of Lighting Professionals TR25 document for guidance on the appropriate lighting levels and column placement through traffic calmed areas. With regards to the school area and main junctions, these could be considered as conflict areas which again have their own lighting requirements as specified in the ILP PLG02 document.

Walking and Cycling

Detailed drawings for the route from Quinton Road to the Town centre have been submitted and are as requested. The site has excellent permeability within the site having three dedicated walking/cycling routes heading North/South; to the West, through the centre and to the East. A link is also proposed to connect to Kemsley Halt. There is an East/West link across the site via Bramblefield Lane which connects into the existing cycle network. Additional facilities are to be provided by the Iwade allocation to connect this site with the village of Iwade via Sheppey Way. An alternative route is also to be provided over the improved Grovehurst/A249 interchange.

An off-site cycle link is to be provided by the applicant between Quinton Road and Sittingbourne Town Centre via a route connecting through Beechwood Avenue. The details of the proposed works have been submitted on [illustrative] drawings 27239/5504/066, 27239/5504/067, 27239/5504/068 are agreed and should be implemented prior to the 50th occupation.

The section from Bramblefield Lane to Quinton Road [running through the site and as illustrated on the Concept Masterplan] should be open and available from the opening of the Secondary School or occupation of the 250th dwelling, whichever is the sooner.

Spine Road, Bus and Rail

It has been confirmed that the site will be served by a regular 334 service and the site will need to include two pairs of stops along the internal spine road. The applicant has confirmed acceptance of a contribution being provided by way of vouchers to homeowners to the amount of £350 [per dwelling and amounting to £420,000 in total] to be used for either rail or bus travel.

The applicant has confirmed their agreement to the Spine Road being open and available for public use to a standard agreeable to the Highway Authority between the Grovehurst Road entrance to the proposed school entrance prior to either school opening or the 100th occupation. Construction access for the school land should be made available in accordance with requirements from KCC education colleagues. [A condition to deal with this is included below.]

Page 42 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

The applicant has confirmed their agreement to details of the Spine Road between the Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South being submitted to the Highway Authority for approval by way of a Reserved Matters application, prior to the occupation of the 345th dwelling. The Spine Road shall be open and available for public use and to a standard as agreed by the Highway Authority by occupation of the 780th dwelling. The applicant has confirmed their agreement to a temporary pedestrian/cycle link between the Phase 1 South site and the school site entrance being made available prior to the opening of either school.

The Concept Masterplan has been updated to include additional overlooking of the Kemsley Halt pedestrian cycle link as requested. The applicant has confirmed agreement that this link will need to be implemented prior to the opening of the school or 200th [dwelling] occupation, whichever is the sooner.

A minimum contribution of £13,147 has been confirmed by the applicant to be claimed by Swale BC for the purposes of improving the facilities at the Kemsley Halt station as required by policy. Payment will be made on full occupation of the 100th dwelling.

[This issue is discussed in the ‘appraisal’ below; the final amount will be significantly larger to reflect the correspondence with Network Rail and Southeastern Railways, and the payment trigger will be agreed in due course, following Members’ resolution for this application.]

Grovehurst/A249 junction

The applicant has agreed to providing a financial contribution towards the preferred HIF [Housing Infrastructure Fund, which is a Government scheme to support infrastructure need to unlock housing development] scheme at an amount of £3,598,503 to be made to the Highway Authority. This will be payable as follows:

25% at 250 occupations, 50% at 450 occupations, 75% at 650 occupations and 100% at 900 occupations.

A Grampian restriction will be required to prevent any occupations beyond 41 dwellings of the phase 1 North element, up to the end of 2022, unless the Highway Authority have awarded a contract for works to deliver the HIF improvement scheme and/or it can be demonstrated with the agreement of the Highway Authority that there is sufficient capacity on the highway to avoid any severe impacts on highway safety or capacity. No further occupations to be permitted beyond the 91[dwelling] Phase 1 North element until such a time as the Highway Authority have awarded a contract for works to deliver the HIF improvement scheme and/or it can be demonstrated with the agreement of the Highway Authority that there is sufficient capacity on the highway to avoid any severe impacts on highway safety or capacity.

Bobbing/A249 junction

As mentioned above there will be required a Grampian condition restricting all development beyond the 91 phase 1 North dwellings until the Grovehurst/A249 junction is improved. The Grampian restriction includes the proposed phase 1 South development of 257 dwellings. The applicant has submitted further analysis on the Bobbing junction suggesting that an interim scheme be provided at 100 occupations prior to implementation of the full mitigation at 450 dwellings. The interim scheme includes additional lanes and flaring to the approach arms however without the full

Page 43 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

signalisation. The Bobbing interchange crossings are a known pedestrian route for school children accessing Bobbing Primary School from “The Meads” residential area. The suggestion to increase the number of lanes without provision of any signalisation for pedestrians would in our opinion introduce unacceptable safety concerns and as such the approach is not agreed. Our suggestion is that the A249 Southbound off-slip is widened and signalised; as an interim the Northbound off-slip could be widened without signalisation due to a suitable “signalised” alternative for those wishing to continue to use that route. The trigger of 100 occupations would be acceptable for an interim scheme that includes signalisation of the Southbound off-slip with pedestrian crossing facilities. We will require a drawing to be submitted to that effect with an accompanying RSA stage 1.

The proposed full mitigation for the Bobbing/A249 junction as demonstrated on submitted drawing 27239_5504_029 should be implemented prior to occupation of the 450th dwelling. The KCC mitigation scheme for the Grovehurst Interchange includes signalisation of the Northbound on-slip to facilitate NMU [non-motorised user] movement. Whilst this is a matter for Highways England, our recommendation is that the above drawing is conditioned to include signalisation of the Northbound on-slip, matching the proposed arrangements at Grovehurst. All development beyond that of any of the 257 dwellings within the Phase 1 South element will be required to have vehicular access to the site via the Northern access point onto Grovehurst Road, not Quinton Road. [Members will note that condition (15C) below will ensure that the Spine Road is provided in full and open to traffic before the occupation of the 780th dwelling as required by KCC Highways and Transportation.]

Concluding summary

Subject to a satisfactory resolution to the Bobbing/A249 junction as identified above and inclusion of the following conditions and contributions being secured, the Highway Authority would raise no objection to the application being recommended for approval.”

7.22 Highways England most recent consultation response (dated 30 October 2020) includes the following:

“Highways England will be concerned with proposals that have the potential to impact on the safe and efficient operation of the SRN [Strategic Road Network]. In the case of this proposed development, Highways England is interested in the potential impact that the development might have on the M2 Motorway and A249 near Sittingbourne.

Highways England issued a response on 10 July 2020 to 18/502190/EIHYB outlining that conditions be attached to any planning permission that may be granted.

We note the following updates.

KCC Position

We note in Kent County Council’s Highways response from 20th October 2020 that it is their aspiration for a signalised crossing at Bobbing:

“Our suggestion is that the A249 Southbound off-slip is widened and signalised; as an interim the Northbound off-slip could be widened without signalisation due to a suitable “signalised” alternative for those wishing to continue to use that route. The trigger of 100 occupations would be acceptable for an interim scheme that includes signalisation of the Southbound off-slip with pedestrian crossing facilities. We will require a drawing to be submitted to that effect with an accompanying RSA [Road Safety Audit] stage 1.”

Page 44 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

In light of these KCC Highways comments, if they are to be pursued we would also need to see a drawing with this signalised arm, the impact assessed in a LinSig model and an accompanying Stage 1 Road Safety Audit to DMRB [Design Manual for Roads and Bridges] standard GG119.

Site Proposals

Reviewing the drainage details submitted it appears that the applicant has opted for a SUDS system throughout the development and that there is no intention to discharge into Highways England’s boundary or drainage network. However, although it is not the applicant’s current intent to use Highways England’s drainage network nevertheless the condition prohibiting its use is still required in case matters change.

With regard to the landscape and ecology management at North West Sittingbourne we note the applicant’s intent as set out in their letter of the 18 September. At this stage the proposals are indicative only and therefore we require a further condition which will require those matters to be agreed to by Highways England.

In addition we note in the Concept Masterplan that an Acoustic Bund is due to be constructed along the M2 border of the site. Given the proximity of the bund to the SRN and the consequential potential changes to local hydrology, drainage and topography we need to ensure that the proposals will not affect the safety or operation of the SRN; hence we recommend a further standard set of conditions regarding the submission and approval of documentation in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges.

Therefore, subject to the application of the required necessary conditions (all updated to reflect latest DMRB referencing), we are satisfied that the proposals will not materially affect the safety, reliability and / or operation of the SRN (the tests set out in DfT Circular 02/2013, particularly paragraphs 9 & 10, and MHCLG NPPF2019, particularly paragraphs 108 and 109), in this location and its vicinity.

Accordingly, I attach our UPDATED formal conditional response for your attention.”

They raise no objection subject to conditions, which are incorporated in the set of conditions recommended below.

7.23 The Rural Planning Consultant has commented on the development and as extract reads as follows:

“…Although it appears that the loss of the land would have a very small proportional effect on the two substantial farm holdings involved, the environmental impact assessment submitted with the proposal identifies a detailed agricultural land classification study that finds all but 2.9 ha of the land concerned to be “best and most versatile” quality (Grades 1, 2 or 3a). This is clearly a significant loss of good quality farmland and is rightly acknowledged as having a “Large Adverse” impact in EIA terms.

However, as referred to in the EIA, policy DM31 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2017 allows development on “best and most versatile” agricultural land if the site is allocated for development in the Local Plan, which I understand to be the position in this case.

Presumably the adverse impact of the scheme, in terms of loss of agricultural land, has been taken into account already, in judging the Planning balance in favour of the

Page 45 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

development in principle; consequently I believe there is nothing further I can add in this regard…”

7.24 The Economy and Community Services Manager comments as follows:

“A development of the scale proposed should provide opportunities, over some period of time, for positive outcomes in relation to Swale Borough Council’s Economic Improvement Plan priority focused on improving skills. Under this priority there are two longer-term targets, namely to

• pursue all opportunities to progress our long-term ambition to enhance the provision of further and higher education accessible to Swale residents • Encourage employers to become more engaged with developing young people, working with local schools and providing progression opportunities through work placements and apprenticeships

The application has the potential to contribute to both, through creating the opportunity for new learning provision, serving the local area, and by working with the developer and its delivery partners to engage in helping develop skills locally, through the types of activity highlighted above. The scale of the development is such that construction will take place over a number of years, during which time an approach to engaging with the local community and young people to secure learning outcomes could become more embedded than on other sites.

It is out experience that achieving meaningful engagement with this agenda, through section 106 agreements, can be challenging and that it may be that such positive outcomes are best achieved through seeking to develop and work within an extended partnership, including local schools and other learning providers delivering relevant learning provision and apprenticeship frameworks.”

In summary, rather than looking for clauses to included in the s106 agreement, the Economic Development Team will instead be seeking to work with the developer(s) on an informal basis

7.25 KCC Ecology have provided a number of consultation responses, which are summarised below under the following sub-headings: general comments, protected species, implications for the SPAs, management of open space and strategic landscaping and biodiversity net gain:

7.25.1 General comments “We have reviewed the ecological information which has been submitted as part of this planning application and we are satisfied that sufficient ecological surveys have been carried out to provide a good understanding of the ecological interest of the site.

When we previously commented we raised concerns that insufficient information had been provided on the species mitigation and how the open spaces would be managed for biodiversity – a Ecological Enhancement and Management report has been submitted and we are satisfied that appropriate mitigation can be implemented within the wider site and provided a good understanding of how the open space area will be managed.”

7.25.1 Protected species

Common lizards and slow worms have been found at the site and a receptor site will need

Page 46 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

to be provided within the site. It is considered that there is space to do this within Phase 1 North and a condition to cover the issue is included below.

With regard to bats, some of the trees at the site are judged to have low potential for bat roosting and a suitable condition is recommended, and this included below. Given the potential impact of external lighting on foraging and commuting bats, a condition is also recommended to deal with the issue.

With regard to wintering and breeding birds, low numbers of the former were recorded within the site. It is also noted that there are some areas of habitat suitable for the latter. Appropriate mitigation will be incorporated in the development. Members will note the informative below.

A Management Plan is recommended for the various areas where ecological mitigation is proposed, and a condition is included below.

7.25.2 Implications for the Special Protection Areas

KCC Ecology note the following:

“The proposed development is within one kilometre of the Swale SPA, Ramsar and SSSI and the Environmental Statement has provided details of a number of measures to demonstrate to detail how the application will avoid a likely significant effect on the designated sites. They include: • Contribution to the North Kent Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy (SAMM) [The fee of £250.39 per dwelling will be paid and an Appropriate Assessment has been carried out] • Creation of public open space • Production Construction and Environmental Management Plan • Implementation of a SuDS Scheme. [This will include open features designed to encourage biodiversity]”

7.25.3 Management of open space and strategic landscaping

Together with KCC Ecology, I have worked with the applicant to ensure that high quality management arrangements (with proper on-going over-sight) are in place to ensure that the main areas of open space and strategic landscaping (notably the proposed Country Park) are well managed for the benefit of biodiversity (as well as for the amenity / informal recreation of residents).

The applicant has provided a position statement on this (by letter dated 18 September 2020) and subsequently in the ‘Landscape & Ecology Management Plan – Framework (October 2020), and the latter is appended to the report. See Appendix 1 below.

In response, KCC Ecology advise that they raise no objection to the suggested approach to open space and ecological management.

7.25.4 Biodiversity net gain

As noted above, a letter dated 7 December 2020 and accompanying table and plans have been provided in respect of Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG).

The most recent comments from KCC Ecology include the following:

Page 47 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

“The BNG metric has been based on the attached plan (NW Sittingbourne BNG letter) and it covers the north and the south of the site. We haven’t received the illustrated masterplan for the southern section of the site as part of these discussions so I’m unclear about how much habitat will be created within the section. It makes it more difficult when trying to assess if the areas of habitat created are accurate.

However my main point is the BNG metric doesn’t take in to account the areas of amenity grassland or the kick around area. The below table provides details of the habitats listed within the habitats created tab of the spreadsheet and suggests that all grassland creation will be neutral grassland with a medium distinctiveness. Typically the quality of amenity grassland and kick around area are less diverse as they are mown much more regularly than grassland habitats – so therefore I’d suggest that there is a need to divide the grassland up in to two sections and put the grassland which will be managed as amenity grassland at a lower value.

I’d like to stress that the amenity grassland can be managed to provide a benefit to biodiversity and therefore will add to the net gain calculation but there is a risk that the net gain percentage will not be as high as originally proposed.”

Members will note the discussion at Paragraphs 9.14.3 and 9.14.4 of the appraisal below.

7.26 Natural England comment as follows:

“Since this application will result in a net increase in residential accommodation, impacts to the coastal Special Protection Area(s) and Ramsar Site(s) may result from increased recreational disturbance. As your authority has measures in place to manage these potential impacts through the agreed strategic solution, subject to the appropriate financial contribution being secured, Natural England is satisfied that the proposal will mitigate against the potential effects of the development on the site(s).”

In addition, I have drafted an Appropriate Assessment and Natural England have confirmed that in the light of it they raise no objection subject to the appropriate mitigation being secured.

This issue is discussed in ‘appraisal’ section below and, among other things, Members will note that the mitigation of £250.39 per dwelling will be secured under the Section 106 Agreement (see Paragraph 9.16.1).

7.27 KCC Archaeology have provided detailed comments, and these are set out on pages 14 to 16 of the consultation response from KCC dated 11/7/2018.

A condition requiring field evaluation works is requested and this included below.

In addition, they comment as follows:

“The exceptions to this are the remains of the First World War trenches, where KCC recommends that these are preserved and recognised in the development Masterplan and proposal. The present conceptual Masterplan suggests that there should be scope to accommodate the preservation of the First World War defences. It would be helpful if a detailed overlay of the mapped location of the defences could be added to the Masterplan. [this has now been provided] However, it seems that the western position

Page 48 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

is in an area of proposed open space, the central position in an area of school landscaping and the eastern position in an area of school playing fields or landscaping.

KCC is satisfied that arrangements for the preservation of the defensive positions can be addressed as a reserved matters issue, should outline consent be granted. A suitably worded condition should be agreed with SBC to secure the preservation of the defences that includes further assessment, targeted evaluation and measures to safeguard them.

In addition, the WW1 heritage assets provide an opportunity to enhance the development, through being referenced and interpreted within the Masterplan and scheme. KCC would welcome proposals for this to come forward in a future detailed application for the new school and in the design of landscaping in the wider site. The defensive trenches were positioned to provide a field of fire over the land to the south east and the present Masterplan, to some extent, would seem to allow this aspect of their setting to be appreciated. However, this should be considered further when a detailed application for the school comes forward.”

KCC Archaeology subsequently provided draft wording for conditions to deal with this matter and confirmed that the amended Concept Masterplan (Revision Q) appears to demonstrate that the trenches can be preserved in situ. I have included the conditions below.

7.28 KCC Growth, Environment and Transport (Developer Contributions) have provided a comprehensive response which among other things provides comments in respect of the required developer contributions for the following matters.

In summary, they raise no objection subject to the following contributions being paid:

- Primary School (construction of) - £4535 per applicable house and £1134 per applicable flat [total amount payable not known as final mix of dwellings is to be determined under subsequent reserved matters applications]; - Secondary School (construction of) - £4687 per applicable house and £1172 per applicable flat; - Community Learning (towards shell and core construction of the Adult Learning section of the new Sittingbourne Hub) - £60.43 per dwelling (or £72,516 in total); - Youth Services (Towards new youth bus and trained driver) - £37.58 per dwelling (or £45,09 in total); - Library Services (Towards shell and core construction of the Library section of the new Sittingbourne Hub) - £227.00 per dwelling (or £272,400 in total); and - Social Care (Towards changing place facility in the new Sittingbourne Hub) - £53.46 per dwelling (or £64,152 in total).

In addition, an informative in respect of the provision of super-fast broadband has been requested.

7.29 The Infrastructure Division at KCC have commented in detail on the proposed location of the site for the two schools. As discussed in the ‘appraisal’ section below, there were lengthy discussion about whether the proposed location as envisaged when the application was submitted was acceptable (notably from an urban design point of view)

Page 49 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

and the County Council were of the view that while there may be advantages to locating the schools elsewhere within the wide site (so that housing could be developed where the schools were proposed), the proposed location should not be changed on the basis that it gave the greatest degree of certainty in terms of ensuring that the schools could be delivered in a timely manner.

7.30 UK Power Networks have raised objection in response to the original consultation on the application (noting that they have not be consulted under the Party Wall etc Act 1996). Concern is expressed that the development could impact on an existing substation. They have not responded to subsequent consultations. This matter can be dealt with under other legislation and does not amount to an issue upon which this application should be determined.

7.31 The Health and Safety Executive standard consultation process was carried out given the presence of a high-pressure gas pipeline under the site, and this exercise generated a response that they “did not advise against the grant of planning permission.”

7.32 Scotia Gas Networks have been consulted, but no comments have been received from them.

7.33 The Capital Projects Officer has responded to consultation and has commented on the appropriate level of contribution for community facilities. It has been agreed that rather than require the provision of a new community building as part of the development, developer contributions will be sought to improve the quality and extent of the facilities available at two existing sites in the vicinity of the application site, namely the Meads Community Hall and the Kemsley Community Centre, both of which are within one kilometre of the nearest part of the application site. This issue is discussed at Paragraph 9.16.1 below.

8. APPRAISAL

8.1 Principle of Development

8.1.1 Members will note that the proposed development would be located on a site that is allocated for the use for which planning permission is sought. The wording of Policy MU1 is set out in full above (see Paragraph 5.4.2 and the accompanying Concept Plan), but for the avoidance of doubt it envisages a minimum of 1500 dwellings on the wider allocation at NW Sittingbourne, together with land for two schools (a primary and a secondary) and a local centre. The proposed development would deliver 1200 of those dwellings and the land required for the schools and the local centre.

8.1.2 Members will have noted above that the application site extends up to the boundary with the corridor for the A249 dual carriageway, which runs approximately north-south along the western side of the site. A strip of land running parallel with this site boundary falls within the Important Countryside Gap and the countryside as defined in the adopted Local Plan and within the application site. However, where this applies to Phase 1 North, all the dwellings proposed are outside the designations. Similarly, where it applies on land south of Bramblefield Lane a condition (16A below) will be used to ensure that all the dwellings are located outside the Countryside Gap and within the built-up area for Sittingbourne.

8.1.3 The proposed development is therefore acceptable as a matter of principle.

8.1.4 Although the acceptability of the principle of this development was never dependent on the application of the “tilted balance” (which under Paragraph 11 of the NPPF sets a

Page 50 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

presumption in favour of sustainable development, and states that where policies that are most important for determining an application are out of date, that permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the polices in the NPPF taken as a whole) as the proposed dwellings would – as noted above - all sit within a mixed use allocation that includes housing, Members should nevertheless note that the Council is not currently able to demonstrate a five year housing supply. The supply is currently 4.6 years although it is anticipated to be significantly greater in the next monitoring year. In this context, Members should note that this scheme will deliver the majority of the 1500 (as a minimum) dwellings proposed under Policy MU1, which is the largest allocated site in the adopted Local Plan. As such, the approval of this development will make a significant positive contribution to ensuring that the Council is able to demonstrate its five-year housing land supply, and a failure to approve the site would push the supply back under 5 years and undermine any ability to secure a 5-year supply for the foreseeable future.

8.2 Provision of Land for Schools

8.2.1 Members will note as this application includes a plot of just under ten hectares in area for the provision of a primary school (which will largely serve the new development) and a secondary school and noting that the latter will serve a catchment extending well beyond the development site, if permission is granted it will amount to a significant step towards the delivery of these important amenities, which will potentially benefit Sittingbourne and the surrounding areas significantly by improving the quantity and choice of secondary education provision available locally.

8.3 Landscape Impacts

8.3.1 Members will note that the landscape impacts are assessed on behalf of the applicant in the Environmental Statement that supports the application and, in particular, they are summarised as follows on pages 102 and 103 of Volume 2 of the ES:

“6.153 The land that has been assessed for the purposes of this ES comprises three land parcels, each of which has distinct landscape character, informed by topography, internal landscape features (or lack of) and surrounding development.

6.154 Each land parcel is directly overlooked by residential properties close to the site boundary, but there are no locations where it is possible to see into all three parcels. In most cases visual receptors are only able to see part of one parcel. Users of roads or PROW which past between the parcels, e.g. users of Grovehurst Road have views into the land at Pheasant Farm to the west and Land at Great Grovehurst Farm experience sequential glimpsed or partial views. Views of the elevated part of the land at Pheasant Farm from to the north are restricted by intervening landform, vegetation and other paraphernalia, such as pylons and road junction signage.

6.155 In the short-term, the proposed development would have a temporary effect of Minor significance in an Adverse direction on the wider local landscape character area (Iwade Arable Farmland). At site level the temporary effects would be Moderate and Adverse as the arable landscape is replaced by new residential development. In the longer term, once the embedded mitigation measures and new landscape structure have established the development will become well integrated with the settlement edge, aided by the comprehensive network of green spaces. The largest character area – CA2 Land south of Bramblefield Lane would be permanently affected in an Adverse direction.

Page 51 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

However, improved access to new open spaces will increase the value of areas where access was previously restricted (CA1 and CA3) and in these cases, the residual effects would be Beneficial.

6.156 During Construction and Year 1 the proposed development would result in temporary effects of Substantial or Moderate significance on a number of visual receptors, due to their close proximity to the site and open views. The direction of effects would be Adverse. By Year 15 the significance of effects would have reduced for some visual receptors as the landscape proposals begin to screen and soften the development, but those visual receptors closest to the site will continue to experience an effect of Substantial significance. Mitigation measures will have some positive impact on views but the direction of effects will be Adverse. In a small number of cases, i.e. where receptors have limited views of fields or where existing view is of low value, the direction of effects will become Beneficial as the development and the associated greenspaces become an established part of the view and introduce positive elements to it.”

8.3.1 I have carried out my own assessment and considered the possibility of harmful landscape impacts, noting that none of the site is subject to either a local landscape designation or to a national one (such as AONB).

8.3.2 With regard to the site itself, Members will note that the landscape SPD (see paragraph 5.7.1 above) identifies it as part of the ‘Iwade Arable Farmlands’ character area, which is considered to be in ‘poor condition and of moderate sensitivity’. I consider that the development has the potential to significantly enhance landscape quality, by among other things introducing locally-appropriate native species trees and through the use of local facing materials and appropriate boundary treatments.

8.3.3 As far as potential landscape impacts on the wider area are concerned, I note that none of the adjoining land has a landscape designation and that although there are designated areas in the wider vicinity these are unlikely to be impacted upon to any significant extent. In particular, I have come to this view having considered the relationship between the application site / proposed development and the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (at its closest point it is 2.7 miles from the southern boundary of the development and approximately 3.5 miles from proposed location for the schools). In conclusion, unacceptable landscape impacts would not result from the development and it is considered to accord with the NPPF and Policy DM24 in this regard.

8.4 Loss of Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land

8.4.1 Members will have noted the comments of the Council’s Agricultural Consultant’s at Paragraph 7.23 above, who notes among other things that this development would result in the loss of a significant area of a Best and Most Versatile (ie Grades 1, 2, and 3a) farmland. He refers to the relevant Local Plan policy, namely DM31, and notes that the general presumption in favour of protecting BMV land from development does not apply where the land in question is allocated for development under the Local Plan. That is the case in this instance, and while the loss of this land as a potentially agricultural resource is regrettable, the allocation for mixed use development under Policy MU1 over-rides this, and as such the development should be accepted as far as implications for the supply of BMV land are concerned.

Page 52 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

8.5 Urban Design and Visual Impacts

8.5.1 These issues are considered below in respect of the three geographical parts that will make up the development as a whole, namely Phase 1 North, Phase 1 South and the remainder of the site, where planning permission is sought in outline.

8.5.2 With regard to Phase 1 North, amendments have been made to both the layout and the architectural treatment that is proposed, in response to comments from officers and Members. These amendments, as described above, have been made, in particular, to reduce the impact on the setting of the adjacent Grade II listed Bramblefield Farmhouse, to remove the 2.5 storey dwellings initially proposed backing on to existing dwellings on Bramblefield Lane, and to improve the level of detailing to dwellings and to avoid blank dwelling elevations in key locations. The amended proposals for Phase 1 North are considered to be acceptable (including the proposed hard and soft landscaping), subject to conditions as set out below (namely 2B to 8B inclusive), which are designed to ensure that good quality materials are used throughout the phase, particularly on the dwellings facing the listed building.

8.5.3 With regard to Phase 1 South, as with Phase 1 North, a fully detailed approval is sought. As set out at Paragraph 2.20 above, following input from Members and officers, the initially-proposed traditional architectural approach has been replaced with a contemporary architectural style. This is considered to be appropriate for the site as the Phase is located in a part of the wider site that is not sensitive in terms of the nature and quality of existing buildings on adjacent sites. The contemporary architecture should also give the Phase a distinctive character that sets it apart from subsequent phases to come forward in due course. The layout – which will consist predominantly of perimeter blocks – and the hard and soft landscaping proposals are also considered to be acceptable. Members will note that a key feature of the latter will be the use of street trees to create a tree-lined Spine Road through the centre of the Phase.

8.5.4 With regard to those areas of the site where permission is sought in outline (ie all areas other than Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South), the proposed disposition of the various elements of the development for these areas of the site – including the position of proposed Schools Site – is shown illustratively on the Concept Masterplan (P1076_18Q). The predominant land use would be residential, and it is considered that the quantum of housing proposed can be satisfactorily accommodated on the land available and in broadly the positions shown.

8.5.5 With specific regard to facing materials, the applicant has provided a high level of commitment to ensuring they are of a good quality on all of the proposed dwellings and the issue is discussed above in respect of the areas where detailed approval is sought. For the outline areas, the applicant comments as follows:

“To this end I can confirm that:

• clay bricks will be used for all external facing brickwork. All the bricks used will comply with the British Standard BS EN 771-1:2011 + A1:2015. I am happy to agree to a condition to this effect. • Where clay tiles are to be used there will be ‘hand crafted’. I am happy to agree to a condition to this effect. • Where slate is to be used these will be best quality Spanish slate. I am happy to agree to a condition to this effect.”

8.5.6 Members will note the relevant conditions below, including (9A), which will require the approval of a Design Code to guide the development within the outline areas of the site.

Page 53 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

8.5.7 With regard to the position of the proposed Schools Site, Members will note that detailed consideration was given to the possibility of re-configuring the outline areas of the site so that the land for the schools could be positioned in a different part of the site so that the proposed pedestrian / cycle route to Kemsley Halt could be integrated with the proposed housing so that the entirety of this link would have been directly over-looked by housing, rather than running along a corridor between the Schools Site and the railway line, and as a result not being so well over-looked. This issue was looked at exhaustively by the developer, in conjunction with KCC Education and the Council. Plans showing a range of possible alternative options were produced, and these are included in the Design and Access Statement Addendum (September 2020). KCC Education have advised that as a result of the various constraints associated with the alternative School Site options, their preference was for the schools to be located in the position envisaged on the Concept Masterplan (P1076_18Q). Therefore although this arrangement has the disadvantage that it is not well over-looked by dwellings, on balance, and noting the potential benefits (including the close proximity to the Kemsley halt railway station) it is considered to be acceptable.

8.5.8 With regard to ‘Building for Life 12’ (now superseded by ‘Building for a Healthy Life’), the assessment of both the detailed (Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South) and the areas where permission is sought in outline was informed by consideration of the extent to which the proposals would accord with the requirements of Building for Life 12.

8.5.9 Overall, the proposals are considered to be acceptable from an urban design and visual amenity point of view.

8.6 Important Countryside Gap – as set out above, a strip of land along the western boundary of the application site (typically a minimum of approximately 38 metres in width) falls within the Important Countryside Gap between Sittingbourne and Iwade, and is therefore subject to Policy DM25 of the Local Plan. The policy aims to ‘retain the individual character and setting of settlements…’ and states that development that would undermine this purpose should be resisted.

8.6.1 Phase 1 North would sit adjacent to the Countryside Gap but none of the proposed dwellings would fall within it. However, some of the proposed Spine Road would sit within the gap.

8.6.2 With regard to the part of the application site to the south of Bramblefield Lane, a linear open space is proposed parallel to the boundary with the A249 and a condition is recommended below to ensure that none of the proposed housing (which Members will appreciate will need to be the subject of a subsequent reserved matters submission to agree, among other things, the siting of the dwellings) is sited within the Countryside Gap.

8.6.3 I consider that the development will not impinge significantly upon the open character of the Countryside Gap and that it would therefore accord with Policy DM25.

8.7 Housing Mix

8.7.1 Policy CP3 of the Local Plan requires the delivery of a ‘wide choice of high-quality homes’ and suggests among other things that public, private and voluntary sectors shall work towards this and “…extend opportunities for home ownership and create sustainable, inclusive mixed communities…” The supporting text accompanying the policy envisages a split between dwelling sizes as follows: 1-bed (7%), 2-bed (36%), 3-bed (42%) and 4+ bed (15%). This suggests almost 80% of new dwellings should either be 2- or 3-bedroom units.

Page 54 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

8.7.2 With regard to Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South, the housing mix proposed is set out in Paragraphs 2.9 and 2.22 above, and this is considered to be acceptable and broadly in line with CP3.

8.7.3 With regard to the parts of the site where permission is sought in outline, Members will note that condition (8A) below will ensure that the housing mix for these areas is informed by a Schedule that shall first have been agreed in writing.

8.8 Heritage

8.8.1 This has not been a significant constraint in this instance as the site is not located within or in close proximity to a Conservation Area and there are no listed buildings within the application site. However, Bramblefield Farm – a Grade II listed building – will face the proposed development on Phase 1 North and back on to the part of the site where the two schools are proposed in outline. As set out above, the dwellings proposed in the immediate vicinity of the listed building have been amended in order to ensure that their design is sympathetic to the sensitive location, in the setting of the listed building. Bespoke conditions are also included below in order to ensure that appropriate facing materials are used.

8.8.2 There are other listed buildings in the vicinity of the Policy MU1 allocation, but none of them (or their settings) would be adversely affected by the proposed development.

8.8.3 It is considered that the proposed development is acceptable from a heritage perspective.

8.9 Residential Amenity

8.9.1 With regard to Phase 1 North, the initially-submitted layout has been refined in the light of comments from officers and, as noted above, the 2.5 storey dwellings initially proposed backing on to existing dwellings on the northern side of Bramblefield Lane have been replaced with two storey units. In the light of these amendments the proposed development is considered to be acceptable both in terms of the implications for the residential amenity of existing dwellings in the vicinity and as far as the amenity of future occupants of the dwellings proposed for this Phase is concerned.

8.9.2 With regard to Phase 1 South, generally the spacing between dwellings is good and, in many instances, back-to-back distances (and garden depths) are in excess of the normal minimum standards aspired to by this Council. Where standards were not initially met, amendments have been made to the layout. The development in this Phase will provide an acceptable level of amenity for future residents. There are existing dwellings in the vicinity but these, together with those for which planning permission has been given on land to the west (see18/500257/EIFUL), are sufficiently separated from the proposed dwellings that unacceptable impacts on residential amenity would not result.

8.9.3 The layouts for both Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South have been designed to achieve 10-metre garden depths, and generally this is the case. Overall, the garden sizes are considered to be acceptable.

8.9.4 With regard to the outline areas, generally ensuring that residential amenity is appropriately dealt with is a matter to be addressed at the reserved matters stage. However, the issue of noise from train horns on the adjacent railway line does need to be addressed now. Members will note that a Technical Note dealing with the potential implications of noise from train horns associated with the adjacent railway has been provided. The document concludes the mitigation will be needed as part of the design of

Page 55 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

dwellings along the eastern boundary of the development proposed in Phase 1 South and for the corresponding dwellings in the outline housing area to the north of Phase 1 South. A dedicated condition is recommended to deal with the issue for Phase 1 South. For dwellings in the outline area, a Design Code is required, and, among other things, it will need to deal with the potential need for noise mitigation.

8.9.5 Members will also appreciate that the proposed site for the schools would, as shown on the Concept Masterplan (P1076_18P) back on to existing dwellings on the southern side of Bramblefield Lane – and the side of the curtilage to Bramblefield Farmhouse. Members will note conditions (5A), (6A) and (7A) below, which together with the process of agreeing details at the reserved matters stage will enable the Council to ensure that this part of the development does not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of existing residents in this area.

8.9.6 In summary, the proposals for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South are acceptable in this respect, and with regard to the areas where outline approval is sought the issue will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage through the agreement of appropriate layouts and dwelling types for the relevant phases.

8.10 Air Quality

8.10.1 Members will note the comments from the Environmental Protection Leader (at Paragraph 7.2.1 above), and that mitigation in the form of a damage cost calculation of £649,781 has been agreed. The applicant comments as follows:

“The last air quality consultation response received on this application (dated 15/5/19) confirmed that the measure proposed for mitigation are acceptable and meet the damage costs (which is confirmed at £649,781 for the whole scheme). However, I understand that the air quality mitigation items we had previously identified and costed for to meet our damage cost calculation (EV charging points, low nox boilers, landscaping and cycle parking sheds) are no longer considered ‘additional’ items and thereby cannot be counted toward the damage cost.

8.10.2 Members will note that landscape planting, low NOX boilers and EV charging points will be secured by conditions included below. In addition, and as set out at Paragraph 9.16.1 below, the damage cost calculation of £649,781 for the whole scheme will be secured under the section 106 Agreement.

8.10.3 Policy DM6 of the Local Plan states that development proposals should not worsen air quality to an unacceptable degree. I am satisfied that the development would have a low or imperceptible impact upon air quality, and would include provision for both on site and off-site air quality mitigation, which would provided on a phase-by-phase basis. On this basis, I am of the opinion that the scheme would accord with this element of policy DM6.

8.11 Highway and Car Parking Implications

8.11.1 The application is supported by a detailed Transport Assessment, which has been evaluated by the Council with significant input from both KCC Highways and Transport (in respect of the implications for the local road network) and Highways England (in respect of the strategic road network, which includes the A249 and the M2). As set out above (see Paragraphs 7.21 and 7.22), both organisations raise no objection subject to conditions and the payment of the relevant developer contributions (see Paragraph 9.16.1 below), including a substantial contribution towards the very major upgrade of the Grovehurst

Page 56 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Road junction with the A249 that is needed in the short to medium term to accommodate traffic growth, including from this development.

8.11.2 Members will note the conditions below (from 5C onwards) that will ensure the necessary off-site mitigation is in place before agreed triggers of dwellings occupations.

8.11.3 With specific regard to the improvements to the Bobbing junction of the B2006 with the A249, significant improvements to the junction are required – to improve traffic flow and facilitate safe pedestrian / cycle movements through the junction. Members will note conditions (20C) and (21C) below.

8.11.4 With regard to the Spine Road, Members will note that this development includes a Spine Road to connect Quinton Road with Grovehurst Road, at the northern end of the development. Where the road passes through Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South it has been designed with segregated pedestrian / cycle paths and street tree planting to form an avenue. This design will create a pleasant environment for pedestrians and cyclists in order to encourage non-car travel modes.

8.11.5 With regard to car parking, I note the comments of KCC Highways and Transportation (see Paragraph 7.21 above): the parking provision on Phase 1 South is above the level required under the ‘Parking Standards’ SPD (May 2020) (which is discussed at Paragraph 5.7.3 above); while for Phase 1 North, the level is slightly below that envisaged for a ‘suburban area’ – 201 spaces against 211 suggested by the SPD. But Members will note the significant proposed interventions to encourage non-car travel modes, and accordingly this small level of under-provision is considered to be acceptable. Overall, the level of provision for both Phases is considered to be acceptable.

8.11.6 With regard to the ‘outline areas’ of the housing development, the quantum and design of the car parking will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage, rather than as part of this application.

8.11.7 With regard to the non-residential elements of the application, Members will note Paragraph 5.7.3.2 above. As with the housing not falling within the detailed phases, the amount and layout of the car parking in these areas will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage.

8.11.8 I note the comments of Bobbing Parish Council and Cllr Hunt in respect of the implications of this development for local roads, notably Sonora Way, that provide a potential connection between the southern access point (from Quinton Road) to the proposed development. This issue has been carefully considered by officers and colleagues and KCC Highways and Transportation and Members will note that mitigation is proposed, in the form of a package of significant highway improvements for the Policy MU1 mixed use (predominantly housing) allocation as a whole. In this specific regard, the relevant improvements will be provided as part of the implementation of 18/500257/EIFUL (as set out above, permission has recently been granted for 155 dwellings on land in the south- west corner of the MU1 allocation) and, in particular, a condition of that approval requires that a scheme of mitigation for Sonora Way is implemented before the occupation of the 50th dwelling of that scheme. This will consist of enhancements to the roundabout where Sonora Way joins the B2006 (Staplehurst Road) to increase capacity by adding running lanes. Improvements in the form of the provision of two mini-roundabouts on Quinton

Page 57 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Road will also be implemented before the occupation of the 1st dwelling under that permission.

8.12 Sustainable Transport

8.12.1 As set out elsewhere in the report, the development will incorporate a substantial package of on- and off-site measures to promote use of non-car modes of travel, in line with National good practice and the Council’s own aspirations.

8.12.2 The applicant has agreed to the principle of funding the provision of a bridge to take the existing public right of way ZU6 over the railway line immediately to the east of the application site. This would be a significant investment with the potential to significantly improve safety at this crossing point and encourage non-car travel modes. Members will note the comments of KCC PROW Officers (see Paragraph 7.10) and Network Rail (see Paragraph 7.7 above). Paragraph 9.16.1 below deals with the implications in respect of the heads of terms for the section 106 agreement, including the fall-back position should it not prove possible for Network Rail to deliver the bridge.

8.12.3 As set out below (in Paragraph 9.16.1), the applicant has agreed to pay a developer contribution to improve facilities at Kemsley Halt to encourage use of the rail network, rather than journeys being made by car.

8.12.4 The detailed layouts for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South have been designed to encourage cycling and walking within the development and to provide connections to existing adjacent developments and to the railway network via the existing Kemsley Halt station. Members will note the various contributions requested by the relevant KCC departments (see Paragraph 9.16.1 below) to ensure that a good level of off-site connectivity with existing Public Right of Way Networks is also achieved, and that where appropriate local networks are upgraded using funding provided by the applicant. Conditions are included below to facilitate pedestrian and cycle connectivity with the other developments proposed as part of the North West Sittingbourne Local Plan allocation.

8.12.5 As advised by KCC Highways and Transportation, it is envisaged that a bus route would serve the development, making use of the proposed Spine Road, which will connect Quinton Road to the south with Grovehurst Road to the north.

8.13 Brick-earth

8.13.1 Members will note the comments received from KCC Minerals and Waste at Paragraph 7.11 above and, in particular, that with the exception of the Phase 1 North part of the site, they consider that the Minerals Assessment provided by the applicant is flawed and that if any planning permission does not require the prior extraction of brick-earth deposits from the site it could amount to the needless sterilisation of a mineral deposit.

8.13.2 Policy DM 7 of the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan is pertinent, and it reads as follows:

Planning permission will only be granted for non-mineral development that is incompatible with minerals safeguarding, where it is demonstrated that either: 1. the mineral is not of economic value or does not exist; or

Page 58 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

2. that extraction of the mineral would not be viable or practicable; or 3. the mineral can be extracted satisfactorily, having regard to Policy DM9, prior to the non-minerals development taking place without adversely affecting the viability or deliverability of the non-minerals development; or 4. the incompatible development is of a temporary nature that can be completed and the site returned to a condition that does not prevent mineral extraction within the timescale that the mineral is likely to be needed; or 5. material considerations indicate that the need for the development overrides the presumption for mineral safeguarding such that sterilisation of the mineral can be permitted following the exploration of opportunities for prior extraction; or 6. it constitutes development that is exempt from mineral safeguarding policy, namely householder applications, infill development of a minor nature in existing built up areas, advertisement applications, reserved matters applications, minor extensions and changes of use of buildings, minor works, non-material amendments to current planning permissions; or 7. it constitutes development on a site allocated in the adopted development plan.

8.13.3 Although it is accepted that it would have been desirable for any brick-earth at the site to have been extracted prior to the commencement of the proposed development, in the light of criterion (7) of Policy DM7 it is argued that it would not be reasonable to try and insist that the brick-earth is extracted. It is also fair to say that to do so would be likely to significantly delay the delivery of the proposed dwellings, which would have various detrimental affects including undermining the Council’s housing supply and delaying the delivery of much-needed affordable housing.

8.13.4 Members will also note that the applicant considers that criteria (3) and (5) of Policy DM7 are applicable and therefore that there is justification for granting permission for the proposed development without the brick-earth first having been extracted.

8.13.5 On balance, it is considered that it would be reasonable to grant planning permission without the brick-earth first having been extracted.

8.14 Ecology

8.14.1 Members will note that no land within the application site or indeed the whole Local Plan allocation has a statutory ecological designation. Members will also note that both KCC Ecology and Natural England raise no objection to the application as set out Paragraphs 7.25 and 7.26 above respectively.

8.14.2 Paragraph 175 of the NPPF deals with biodiversity and advises that “When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following principles:

(d) …while opportunities to incorporate biodiversity improvements in and around developments should be encouraged, especially where this can secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.”

The Government planning guidance does not specify a target percentage for the biodiversity net gain that should be sought from new development.

8.14.3 I have asked the applicant to address this objective and a detailed assessment has recently been received in respect of Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South. This demonstrates that in respect of these areas, an overall biodiversity net gain over the existing baseline of

Page 59 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

20 % can be achieved. KCC Ecology have considered the detailed submission and agree that it is achievable. Members will note condition (13B) below, which will be used to ensure that this is actually delivered.

8.14.4 With regard to the remainder of the site, where outline approval is sought, comprehensive information has not been provided, and condition (12A) will be used to ensure that in due course an acceptable level of biodiversity net gain (at least 20%) can be achieved.

8.14.5 With regard to Landscape and Open Space Management, Members will note the document attached as Appendix 1 and that KCC Ecology (see paragraph 7.25) are content with what is proposed. Importantly, the Greenspaces Manager is also happy with the proposals. Among other things, Members will note that the proposed arrangements will ensure that the open space / strategic landscaping and ecological mitigation areas are subject to proper on-going management and that the Council will retain the opportunity to positively intervene in management arrangements if it proves necessary.

8.14.6 As noted above, the soft landscaping proposals for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South have been amended to ensure that native species predominate, though a limited number of Turkish hazels are specified (25 in total) as these are favoured by KCC Highways and Transportation as a durable species that is well suited to being grown alongside a potentially well used road such as the Spine Road that forms part of this development. This limited use of a non-native tree species is considered to be justified on arboricultural grounds in this specific situation. The layouts have also been amended to introduce some tree planting into rear gardens, where there is sufficient space. The amount and type of planting proposed in these areas is considered to be acceptable and is expected to contribute significantly to enhancing biodiversity as well as having beneficial impacts in respect of visual and residential amenity.

8.14.7 With regard to the areas where detailed approval is not sought, conditions are set out below – including a requirement for a Design Code to guide the development of future phases and with respect to biodiversity net gain – to ensure that appropriate amounts and types of soft landscaping are delivered and to maximise the biodiversity net gain.

8.14.8 As noted above (see paragraph 7.26), Natural England have considered the Appropriate Assessment (which is attached as Appendix 2 to the report) and raise no objection subject to the payment of the standard tariff of £250.39 per dwelling to be spent on mitigating recreational impacts on the Special Protection Area.

8.14.9 Overall, the application will deliver a good package of mitigation for potential ecological impacts, and I am confident that in due course a significant level of biodiversity net gain across the site will be achieved. Members will note the applicable conditions set out below and the relevant s106 Heads of Terms (see paragraph 9.16.1 and 9.16.2 below).

8.15 Climate Change / Sustainable Design and Construction

8.15.1 The Council declared a climate and ecological emergency on 26th June 2019. The purpose of the declaration was to draw attention to the urgent need to reverse the decline in biodiversity in Swale and to take effective action to reduce carbon emissions in the Borough. The declaration sets the goals for carbon emissions from the Council’s operations to be carbon neutral by 2025 and for the Borough to be carbon neutral by 2030.

Page 60 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

I note that the Inspector’s decision in respect of the Land West Of Barton Hill Drive application (ref 18/503135/OUT) referred to this declaration and stated that “I am satisfied that this is a material consideration and is supported by development plan policies and national policies within the Framework.” A Climate and Ecological Emergency Action Plan (22nd April 2020) has also been produced.

8.15.2 I have dealt with biodiversity issues above. With regard to the urgent need to minimise the carbon dioxide emissions from development, the applicant has agreed that the housing part of this development should achieve a reduction of 31% compared to the current Building Regulations. This will be delivered through a combination of enhanced energy efficiency measures (notably additional insulation), efficient heating boilers and solar panels on some of the dwellings. Full details are set out in the Sustainability Statement (July 2020). Although not the 50% reduction to which Members aspire, I consider that this would be an acceptable outcome, mindful that a much smaller reduction was agreed by Members in respect of the Redrow application (reference 18/500257/EIFUL) on land in the south-west corner of the NW Sittingbourne allocation, and that the current adopted local plan policy does not specify a minimum 50% reduction. I have therefore included conditions below to deal with this (see condition 20B for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South). With regard to the parts of the application where approval for housing is sought in outline, Members will note that the proposed condition (14A) does not specify a percentage reduction, which will allow an appropriate reduction to be agreed in due course taking account of the prevailing policy at that time (which could well require a reduction of more than 50% compared to current Building Regulations).

8.15.3 With regard to the non-residential areas, Members will note condition (18A) below which will ensure that the proposed Local Centre is built to at least BREEAM very good standard.

8.15.4 As far as the schools are concerned, in the light of the justification provided by Kent County Council I have queried whether it is appropriate to require the proposed schools to achieve a formal BREEAM ‘very good’ standard (conditions (17A) and (18A) below), and are intending to submit a written justification in this regard. I will update Members at the meeting.

8.16 Section 106 Agreement

8.16.1 A section 106 agreement will be required to secure the following developer contributions:

• £1 million to cover full cost of a pedestrian railway bridge (to be provided by Network Rail, who have agreed with the applicant that this level of contribution is appropriate in this instance) where PROW ZU6 crosses the railway line, at the Vicarage Public Footpath level crossing; further to the correspondence with the relevant consultees above, the s106 will need to include a fall-back provision in case the bridge can’t be provided and alternative mitigation needs to be provided;

• In the event that the footbridge cannot be provided, and a reduced cost mitigation scheme is agreed instead, the money saved shall be made available (under the s106 agreement) for provision of other non-car-based transport improvements in the vicinity;

• Delegated authority is sought to negotiate a commuted sum to cover the cost of the maintenance of the bridge;

Page 61 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• £1,036,800 (or £864 per dwelling) for qualitative and / or quantitative improvements to primary health care in the vicinity, which could include (but not necessarily be limited to) the adjacent Grovehurst Surgery.

• £60,000 (or £50 per dwelling) for improvements to Kemsley Halt rail station;

• £91,770 for the purposes of improving the surface and environment of Restricted Byway ZU11 (to the south of the application site, and running through the Meads housing development)

• £23,345 for the purposes of improving the surface and environment of Public Footpath ZU6 (to the east of the application site).

• £2,500 towards the cost of making an Order under section 3 of the Cycle Tracks Act 1984 to upgrade the length of Public Footpath ZU8 to a cycle track (to the south of the application site).

• £1,000 towards the cost of a Creation Agreement to establish a PROW between ZU6 and Quinton Road (within the application site)

• £1,000 towards the cost of a Creation Agreement to upgrade Public Footpath ZU54/ZR110/ZU6 to Public Bridleway or Restricted Byway status (across the application site)

• a formal sports contribution of £711,600 (or £593 per dwelling) has been agreed, and this will be spent on improving provision locally in general accordance with the Council’s Playing Pitch Strategy, which identifies the need for proposed basic facilities and some pitch improvements to increase capacity at Kemsley Recreation Ground and pitch improvements at Milton Recreation Ground.

• Air Quality; further to paragraph 7.2 above, the s106 agreement will require the payment of a total of £649,781 for the whole scheme, and this will be dealt with on a phase-by-phase basis. The s106 agreement will also require that prior to the commencement of each phase details of the air quality mitigation measures proposed for that phase to meet the damage cost for it are provided. The obligation will need to state that if measure cannot be identified or agreed, then a contribution to the value of the damage costs for that phase (on a pro rata basis related to the number of units in each phase as a proportion of 1200 proposed in total) is paid to the Council to fund strategic air quality improvement measures.

• A community hall is not proposed as part of this development, but (as set out at Paragraph 7.33 above) contributions are sought so that the existing facilities at The Meads Community Hall and Kemsley Community Hall can be upgraded so that they can better accommodate additional demand for their facilities as a result of the proposed development, which will ultimately lead to a significant increase to the size of the local population, though the extent of this increase will depend on the final mix of dwelling sizes. The contributions sought are £22,500 and £354, 000 respectively.

• vouchers to homeowners to the amount of £350 per dwelling, and amounting to £420,000 in total, to be used for either rail or bus travel

• £45,000 for bus stop improvements to Groverhurst Road and Quinton Road in the vicinity of the site

Page 62 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• £3,598,503 (or just under £3000 per dwelling) to be made towards the cost of the proposed major upgrade of the Grovehurst/A249 junction;

• With regard to the other off-site highway works that are required in order to mitigate the highway impacts arising from the MU1 Local Plan allocation, these will generally be secured under conditions as set out below (for example, in respect of the mitigation required at the junction of the A249 with the B2006 at Bobbing – see conditions (20C) and (21c) below) and as attached to the planning approvals in respect of the other planning applications (namely 18/500257/EIFUL and 18/502372/EIOUT) relating to parts of the Local Plan allocation. This approach has been agreed with the respective developers and with the highway authorities and has the advantage that the various works will need to be carried out on or before the trigger points in the relevant conditions. This is in contrast to the alternative approach, where payments are secured under s106 agreements and then passed to the highway authority to spend on the relevant works, which introduces a degree of uncertain in terms of when the highway works will ultimately be delivered. It is also worth saying that it is considered that the proposed approach would accord with the relevant planning legislation.

• With respect to the provision of wheelie bins, the final amount payable will depend on the ultimate mix of houses and flats, but Members will note the following:

• For houses, the requirements are as follows:

1 x 180ltr green refuse bin at £44.80 per bin 1 x 240ltr blue recycling bin at £44.80 per bin 1 x 23ltr black food bin at £10.40 per bin 1 x 5ltr kitchen caddy at £5.20 per bin

Total per house: £105.20

• For flats, the requirements are as follows:

1 x 1100ltr refuse bin per 5 flats at £435 per bin 1 x 1100ltr recycling bin per 5 flats at £435 per bin 1 x 140ltr food bin per 5 flats at £78.20 per bin

Total per apartment: £189.64

• Contributions are also requested in respect of primary and secondary education, social care, library service and youth services and community learning. These are itemised at Paragraph 7.28 above.

• Further to the discussion in respect of ecology above, with regard to recreational impacts on the Special Protection Areas in the wider vicinity, the mitigation will need to be paid for in accordance with the agreed protocol. The agreed tariff of £250.39 per dwelling (or £300,468 in total) will be payable.

• A Travel Plan monitoring contribution of “no more than £193,658” is proposed as part of a total fund of £300, 000 (or 64.6%) to monitor compliance with Travel Plan

Page 63 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

measures across this Local Plan allocation and the allocation for the expansion of Iwade. The money would be transferred to a Travel Plan consultant, rather than being paid to the Council. • £1,422 to be paid to enable an audit of the Travel Plan.

With regard to s106 monitoring, this will need to be agreed in due course.

8.16.2 In addition, the s106 agreement will need to cover non-financial matters as follows:

With regard to open space and landscape management, Members will have noted the ‘Landscape and Ecology Management Plan – Framework (October 2020)’ (attached as Appendix 1), the legal agreement will need to include clauses to deal with the following aspects in respect of it:

• The requirement for submission of a site wide OLEMP (Outline Landscape and Ecology Management Plan) and phased DLEMPs (Detailed Landscape and Ecology Management Plans), with reference made to the approved ‘LEMP Framework’. The LEMPs will, among other things, include requirements for on-going monitoring of the delivery of ecological enhancements and the overall biodiversity net gain;

• The requirements for the site wide OLEMP and phased DLEMP, including the LEMP committee and the ecology monitoring;

• Delegated authority is sought to insert extra provisions as may be required to ensure that robust, sustainable mechanisms are in place for the long-term management of the open space, strategic landscaping and other ecological mitigation areas. Further to the appended ‘Framework’ document, it is envisaged that Bobbing Parish Council would also be invited to play a formal role in the over-sight of the management processes;

• Two Local Equipped Areas of Play (LEAPs) and one Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (LEAP); and

• The provision of a minimum of 19.2 hectares of open space / other green infrastructure.

With regard to the use of local labour and the provision of apprenticeship places, Members will note the comments of the Council’s Economy and Community Services Manager at Paragraph 7.24 above. As such, it is not proposed to include clauses in the Section 106 Agreement to set formal targets in this regard.

With regard to the local centre, as set out above this would extend to a minimum of 0.5 hectares and will provide a minimum of 1200 square metres of space for retail and other appropriate commercial uses. I consider that the Section 106 Agreement should require that commercial space is to be substantially complete on or before the occupation of the 500th dwelling, with an agreed proportion of the space provided on or before the occupation of the 250th dwelling.

With regard to affordable housing, Members will note the comments of the Affordable Housing Manager (at Paragraph 7.17 above), and that across the entire site 10% of the proposed dwellings (equating to 120 dwellings in total) will be affordable, and with the tenure split being 90-10 in favour of affordable rent. While the mix (between houses and flats and with regard to the number of bedrooms of the dwellings) is to be agreed at the

Page 64 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

reserved matters stage, the s106 agreement will need to specify that it should be proportionate with the mix for the private sale housing/

For Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South, it has been agreed that all of the affordable units (35 in total) will be in Phase 1 South; the tenure split will be 90-10 in favour of affordable rent, the mix and disposition of affordable units have also been agreed and would be as follows:

31 affordable rent units in a mix of 1- and 2-bed flats (15 in total) and 2-, 3- and 4-bed houses (16 in total) and four shared ownership units (2 3-bed and 2 4-bed houses). Three of the flats would be M4 (3) standard, which is defined at paragraph 2.23 above.

Members will note that the applicant has agreed to provide the site for the two schools (to measure a minimum of 9.89 hectares) at nil cost to either SBC or KCC, and the s106 agreement will need to be drafted in a manner that ensures that this happens on or before an agreed trigger. Members will note that KCC have agreed to the slight reduction in site area from the 10 hectares referred to in the Local Plan. With regard to the timing of the delivery of this land to KCC, the applicant suggests that this should take place within 18 months of the commencement of development. However, as KCC have indicated that a trigger point for this has not been agreed, delegated authority is sought to agree an appropriate trigger – informed by input from KCC – in due course.

The existing Public Right of Way over the railway line would need to be diverted to accommodate the proposed footbridge. Authority is sought to include suitable wording in the Section 106 Agreement.

I have considered the possibility of including a clause to require the mitigation to the railway line to be implemented in full before a specified trigger, but given that the delivery of the infrastructure would depend on a 3rd party, namely Network Rail, who will not be a party to the Section 106 Agreement, it is not reasonable to do this. The Section 106 Agreement will ensure that Network Rail have the funds to implement the mitigation, but ultimately the delivery of it will be a matter for them.

The Section 106 agreement will also need to include a phasing plan.

8.16.3 Delegated authority is sought to agree appropriate triggers for the various payments set out above and in respect of the non-financial contributions. Authority is also sought to amend the amount, subject with conditions or make other amendments to the Section 106 Agreement wording where required.

8.17 Drainage / Flood Risk

8.17.1 With regard to surface water drainage, Members will have noted above that the majority of the site is within Flood Zone 1. However, as described above, a small portion of the site is located in Flood Zone 3, where the risk of flooding is considered to be high. An updated Flood Risk Assessment was provided and in response KCC Drainage have submit new comments stating that they raise no objection subject to conditions as previously requested.

8.17.2 It will also be noted (at Paragraphs 7.4 and 7.5 above) that both KCC Drainage and the Lower Medway Internal Drainage Board raise no objection to the application subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

Page 65 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

8.17.3 With regard to foul drainage, Members will note that Southern Water raise no objection and that a condition to deal with this (31C and 37C below) are recommended.

8.17.4 On the basis of the above, unacceptable drainage impacts are not anticipated.

8.18 Archaeology

8.18.1 Members will note the comments of KCC Archaeology at Paragraph 7.27 above. The applicant has amended the application in response to their initial comments and KCC Archaeology now raise no objection subject to three conditions (numbers 46C, 47C and 48C), and I have included these below.

8.19 Environmental Impact Assessment

8.19.1 Further to Paragraphs 2.34 and 2.35 above, this application has been determined in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, and I consider that proper consideration has been given to all of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed development.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 This application seeks planning permission (in hybrid form) for a development as described in full at the start of this report, but which includes 1200 dwellings, the erection of a primary school and a secondary school, a local centre, a country park and a range of supporting infrastructure on a site allocated for such development by adopted Local Plan Policy MU1.

9.2 The development has been carefully scrutinised by officers, and significantly amended in response to our comments and those received from technical consultees (as set out in Section 7 above). I now believe the scheme to be well-considered and well designed, and consider that it would be unlikely to give rise to any significant negative impacts upon local residential amenity, highways safety and amenity, ecology, air quality, the special interest of the adjacent listed Bramblefield Farmhouse, or in any other regards. I have considered objections from local residents, and concerns raised by Bobbing Parish Council and Iwade Parish Council, but they do not identify harm that would justify the refusal of this application in my opinion.

9.3 Furthermore, the development would deliver significant benefits: to the supply of housing generally (and affordable housing, in particular); through the grant of permission for two schools (including a secondary school, that would make a substantial contribution towards addressing a long-standing existing need in the Sittingbourne area); through the delivery of a country park and the provision of a local centre. As set out above, a very significant package of developer contributions would also be secured in order to mitigate any adverse impacts that might otherwise have arisen from the development; Members will note the contributions to paid in respect of education (as well as the provision of land for the two schools at nil cost), healthcare, highway infrastructure and air quality mitigation, among other things.

9.4 In conclusion, the development would be in accordance with the NPPF and the adopted Local Plan and the relevant SPDs, and I consider that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions as set out below and the signing of a Section 106 agreement

Page 66 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

to secure the developer contributions and other mitigation as described as Paragraphs 9.16.1 to 19.16.3 above.

10. RECOMMENDATION

10.1 GRANT Subject to the views of KCC Education in respect of the BREEAM conditions for the proposed schools, the signing of a suitably worded Section 106 agreement (to secure the mitigation set out at paragraphs 9.16.1 to 9.16.3 above) and the following conditions. Authority is also sought to amend the wording of the Section 106 agreement and of the conditions as set out below as may reasonably be required.

CONDITIONS

Outline areas

(1A) Details relating to the landscaping, layout, scale and appearance of the proposed dwelling(s) the access thereto and the other components of the development hereby approved in relation to each phase of the development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any development is commenced on the relevant phase of the development.

Reason: In pursuance of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(2A) The applications for approval of reserved matters referred to in Condition (1) above must be made not later than three years from the date on which the Roads Investment Strategy Scheme at M2 J5 is open to the public.

Reason: In pursuance of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(3A) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason: In pursuance of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(4A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall show paths that shall include vehicle mitigation measures to prevent unauthorised access by motorised vehicles into the Country Park. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety and designing out opportunities for anti-social behaviour.

(5A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above, shall show a secondary school of no more than six form entry and no more than 14 metres in height.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and convenience.

(6A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above shall show a primary school of no more than two form entry and no more than 10.5 metres in height.

Page 67 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and convenience.

(7A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above for the reserved matters relating to the primary and secondary schools shall include a buffer of a minimum of ten metres in depth on the northern boundary with dwellings on the southern side of Bramblefield Lane.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and residential amenity.

(8A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above in respect of any residential phase be in accordance with a Housing Mix Schedule that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of delivering an appropriate housing mix.

(9A) Prior to the submission of a reserved matters application for any phase, a design code for all of the phases other than Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South of development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall be in accordance with the approved Design Code that shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

• A design strategy for buildings, to include housing mix, density and massing, architectural treatment, the use of feature buildings in key locations, principles for the use of external materials (which should be locally sourced unless it is demonstrated that this cannot reasonably be achieved), boundary treatments, and provision of car parking; • Principles for establishing character areas; • Principles for road hierarchy, pedestrian and cycle connections in each phase (and with the development proposed under reference 18/500257/EIFUL on land adjoining this site), including the alignment, width, lighting and surface materials to be used; • A strategy for street tree planting (including for the creation of an avenue along the Spine Road); • A strategy for lighting to the network of cycle and footpaths; • Principles for the layout to accommodate and respond to existing landscape features within the site (including for the retention of existing trees, hedges and other boundary planting); • A levels strategy to retain (where possible) the existing topography and minimise the creation of artificial development platforms; • Design of the public realm, including principles for the design and layout of public open space, areas for play, lighting, street furniture and sustainable urban drainage (which shall incorporate open features such as ponds, ditches and swales); • A strategy to provide open space (including an appropriate quantum of Neighbourhood Equipped Areas of Play, Local Equipped Areas of Play and Local Areas of Play), footpath and cycle linkages through each phase; • A car parking strategy to demonstrate how parking provision for both the housing and the non-residential elements of the development will be well integrated both with the built development and hard and soft landscaping (with an onus on the provision of native species street trees); • A strategy for designing out opportunities for crime and antisocial behavior, in order to accord with Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; • A strategy to ensure that dwellings are provided with water butts and garden compositing facilities (or appropriate communal provision for the apartment blocks); and

Page 68 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

• A strategy for electric vehicle charging points to ensure that each dwelling is served by an appropriate EV charging point and that appropriate provision is made in respect of the non-residential components of the development.

Reason: In the interests of providing a high-quality layout and design for the outline areas of the development.

(10A) A pedestrian and cycle link between the site of the schools hereby approved and Grovehurst Road shall be provided before the first occupation of either school in accordance with details that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of encouraging travel by non-car modes.

(11A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above shall include full details of the siting and specification of the acoustic barrier (which shall consist of an earth bund and acoustic fence along the top) as shown indicatively on the Concept Masterplan (drawing number P_1076_18Q). These details shall include arrangements for access to the planted area between the acoustic fence and the site boundary and reflect the approved version of the Geotechnical Design Report. The approved details shall be implemented before the occupation of the first dwelling other than those proposed in Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South.

Reason: in the interests of residential amenity, visual amenity and highway safety in relation to the adjoining corridor.

(12A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall in respect of each phase be in accordance with a detailed scheme for all proposed habitat features and enhancements (including a programme for implementation) for the outline areas that shall be designed to deliver a biodiversity net gain of a minimum of 20 % across the entire site (and a minimum of 10% in any one phase) and shall be broadly based upon Ecology Partnership letter dated 7 December 2020.The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and prior to occupation of the first dwelling in each phase the agreed mitigation for that phase shall have been implemented, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity

(13A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall show adequate land, reserved for the parking (including in car ports) (in accordance with the currently adopted Swale Borough Council ‘Parking Standards’ May 2020) which land shall be kept available for this purpose at all times and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking or re-enacting that Order) or not shall be carried out on such land or in a position as to preclude vehicular access thereto; such land and access thereto shall be provided prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted.

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

(14A) Prior to the construction of any dwelling in any phase (other than Phase 1 North or Phase 1 South) details of the materials and measures to be used to increase energy efficiency and thermal performance and reduce carbon emissions and construction waste shall be

Page 69 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials and measures.

Reason: in the interests of sustainable development.

(15A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall show the proposed dwellings set back by a minimum of 55 metres from application site boundary with the A249 corridor.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the separation of settlements and protecting the Important Countryside Gap.

(16A) The primary school hereby approved shall be constructed to BREEAM ‘Very Good’ Standard or an equivalent standard and prior to the use of any of the buildings commencing the relevant certification relating to that building shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming that the required standard has been achieved.

Reason: In the interest of promoting energy efficiency and sustainable development.

(17A) The secondary school hereby approved shall be constructed to BREEAM ‘Very Good’ Standard or an equivalent standard and prior to the use of any of the buildings commencing the relevant certification relating to that building shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming that the required standard has been achieved.

Reason: In the interest of promoting energy efficiency and sustainable development.

(18A) The Local Centre hereby approved shall be constructed to BREEAM ‘Very Good’ Standard or an equivalent standard and prior to the use of any of the buildings commencing the relevant certification relating to that building shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming that the required standard has been achieved.

Reason: In the interest of promoting energy efficiency and sustainable development.

(19A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above in respect of the two schools hereby approved shall include full details of the proposed scheme of external lighting (Including details of any floodlighting proposed for the sports pitches as shown indicatively on the Concept Masterplan (drawing number P_1076_18Q).

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and preserving the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse.

(20A) Before the first use of either of the schools hereby approved, details of a scheme to allow community use of the facilities (including the sports pitches) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be operated in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of encouraging community use of the schools complex.

(21A) No dust, or fume extraction or filtration equipment, or air conditioning, heating, ventilation or refrigeration equipment shall be installed on any part of the Local Centre complex hereby approved until full details of its design, siting, discharge points and predicted acoustic performance have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Page 70 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(22A) No deliveries to the Local Centre premises hereby approved shall take place outside the hours of 0700 - 2100 hours Monday to Saturday, and 09:00 - 20:00 hours on a Sunday, bank or public holiday.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

(23A) The Local Centre units hereby permitted shall not be open to customers or any other persons not employed within the business operating from the site outside the hours of 0700 – 2300.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

(24A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall show in respect of the commercial units in Local Centre, the space to be sub-divided such that none of the units would have a gross internal floorspace of greater than 300 square metres, and the space to be provided into not less than six units.

Reason: In the interests of the provision of a number of smaller units suitable for the approved Local Centre.

(25A) The Reserved Matters for Phase 3 South shall include details of a new service road to the gas governor. The road shall be designed in accordance with the utilities providers’ standards. The new service road shall be delivered in accordance with a programme submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of minimising the amount of traffic needing to cross the railway line to access the gas governor site.

(26A) for each phase shall include cross-sectional drawings through the site showing proposed site levels and finished floor levels for that phase, and the development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details for the particular phase in question.

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory form of development having regard to the sloping nature of parts of the site.

(27A) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1A) above shall show the land proposed for the two schools hereby approved (which shall measure not less than 9.89 hectares) in broadly the position shown on the Concept Masterplan (drawing number P_1076_18Q, and this part of the site shall be positioned such that a corridor of land no less than 10 metres in width is provided between the land for the schools and the adjacent railway corridor for the provision of a pedestrian and cycle path (with associated landscaping) to connect with the Kemsley Halt railway station.

Reason: In the interests of good planning and encouraging use of sustainable, non-car travel modes.

(28A) The commercial space in the Local Centre hereby approved shall be used for uses falling within the following Uses Classes A1 (shops), A2 (financial / professional services), A3 (restaurant/ café), A4 (drinking establishment), A5 (hot food take-away), and D1 (non- residential institution) and no more than one unit shall be occupied by a restaurant/ café use or a hot food takeaway use (as defined by Classes A3 and A5 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) (or any order or regulations revoking and re-enacting that Order)

Page 71 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Reason: To avoid a proliferation of such uses that would offer a very limited benefit to the local area.

(29A) The details submitted in pursuance of condition (1A) above, shall include two sets of bus stops on the Spine Road (including details of the shelters and a programme for implementation), and the agreed details shall be implemented in full in accordance with agreed implementation programme.

Reason: In the interests of encouraging sustainable travel modes.

(30A) A strategy for noise mitigation measures in respect of train horn noise (further to the Technical Note – Noise, October 2020, and which shall include an implementation programme) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of construction of any dwellings (other than those in Phase 1 North or Phase 1 South), and the agreed measures shall implemented in accordance with the agreed programme.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Phase 1 South and Phase 1 North

(1B) The development to which this permission relates in respect of Phase 1 North must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.

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

(2B) The development to which this permission relates in respect of Phase 1 South must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.

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

(3B) Notwithstanding the information submitted and with the exception of Plots 271 to 276 inclusive, no development beyond the construction of foundations shall take place on Phase 1 North or Phase 1 South until details of the external finishing materials, including the weatherboarding (which shall be locally sourced where possible) to be used on the dwellings – and the facing bricks for the boundary walls hereby approved - shown on the hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(4B) Unless otherwise previously agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the relevant works, the roofing tiles to be used on plots 271-276 of the development hereby approved shall be the Keymer handmade clay plain tiles in the Goxhill range (Brindle mix). Furthermore, the clay ridge and hip tiles to be used shall be from the same handmade tile range, and shall be mortared into place using traditional construction detailing with the hip tiles supported using traditional hip irons.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse and of visual amenity.

Page 72 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(5B) Prior to the commencement of construction on the following specified plots, a sample panel of the facing brickwork (including single stock clay bricks for key architectural detailing - windows headers, plinth top-course shaped brick detailing and contrasting brick banding to the front and side elevations) to be used on Plots 271-276 shall be prepared on site and made available for inspection, and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The panel(s) shall be not less than 1m2 in size and shall include the specific mortar colour, profile and coursing depth to be used. Unless otherwise agreed in writing prior to the preparation of the sample panel(s) for inspection, these shall be constructed from yellow bricks from the Wienerberger Smeed Dean range and red bricks from the Lambs Bricks non handmade multi stock range (Chartwell Medium Multi Stock, Chartwell Blended Multi Stock and Chartwell Surrey Multi Stock). The dwellings on Plots 271 to 276 shall then be constructed using the approved materials.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse and of visual amenity.

(6B) Prior to the commencement of construction on plots 271-276, details of the specific timber or composite (timber-fronted) doors (including manufacturer / supplier details) to be used shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The details to be provided shall include a specification sheet for the exact product/model to be used, confirmation of the paint or stain finish to be used, details of the door furniture to be used and confirmation of the specific option to be used where there are design options for a particular door product/model. The dwellings on Plots 271 to 276 shall then be constructed using the approved materials.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse and of visual amenity.

(7B) Prior to construction of the foundations for plots 271-276, the following key construction details shall first have been submitted to and subsequently approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: (for all 6 plots) • 1:5 vertical section showing eaves detailing (including guttering) • 1:10 elevation detail of porch (front and side elevation) • 1:5 vertical section of verge detail to porch roof • 1:10 part elevation details of chimney head and pots (including lower string course) and chimney shoulder (Corfe Feature house type units only – plots 272-274 & 276) • 1:5 vertical section of junction detailing between flat roofed section and pitched roof planes • 1:5 vertical section of angled brick cill detailing to front elevation first floor windows (Chedworth Feature house type units only – plots 271 & 275) • 1:5 elevation detail of scalloped lead flashing details to front elevation first floor windows. See Informative B, below.

The dwellings on Plots 271 to 276 shall then be constructed using the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse and of visual amenity.

(8B) Before any development beyond the construction of foundations takes place on plots 271, 272, 273, 274, 275 and 276, a 1:10 elevation detail and a 1:5 plan and vertical section for

Page 73 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

each window type to be used, together with key associated design information shall first have been submitted to, and subsequently approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons: In the interests of visual amenity.

(9B) In respect of Plots 271 to 276 inclusive, upon completion of the dwellings, no further development, whether permitted by Classes A, B, C, D or H of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, and the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse.

(10B) In respect of Plots 271 to 276 inclusive, no flues, vents or meter boxes shall be fixed to elevations fronting onto access ways or communal landscaped spaces without the express prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the setting of Bramblefield Farmhouse and of visual amenity.

(11B) The gates as denoted by ‘G’ symbols on the Phase 1 South layout (drawing P.1076_10 Sheet 2 Revision ZE) shall be fitted with locks before the corresponding dwellings are first occupied.

Reason: in the interests of minimising opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour.

(12B) In respect of Phase 1 North, no development beyond the construction of the foundations shall take place until full details of the acoustic barrier (including the siting and specification of acoustic bund and fence along the top, and which shall accord with the approved version of the Geotechnical Design Report, and include arrangements for access to the planted area between the acoustic fence and the site boundary) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall then be implemented in full before the occupation of the 1st dwelling.

Reason: in the interests of residential amenity, visual amenity and highway safety in relation to the adjoining A249 corridor.

(13B) In respect of Phase 1 North, full details of the layout, specification and landscaping for the Country Park and the Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (including boundary treatment, other hard landscaping and soft landscaping details and SUDS features) – which are shown indicatively on the ‘Illustrative Landscape Masterplan – Phase 1 North’ - shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the occupation of the first dwelling in this phase. The agreed details shall then be implemented in full before the occupation of the 40th dwelling.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, encouraging biodiversity, highway safety (in respect of the adjoining A249 corridor) and making proper provision for informal recreation.

(14B) In respect of Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South, no dwelling shall be occupied until a detailed scheme for all proposed habitat features and enhancements (and including an implementation programme, which shall be designed to deliver the new habitat / enhancements at the earliest opportunity) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be designed to deliver a biodiversity

Page 74 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

net gain of a minimum of 20% across the two phases (with a minimum of 5% for either phase) and shall be based upon the Ecology Partnership letter dated 7 December 2020 and the ‘Illustrative Landscape Masterplan for Phase 1 North. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and implementation.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.

(15B) The area shown on the plans hereby approved for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South (namely drawings P.1076_10 Sheet 1 Rev ZJ and P.1076_10 Sheet 2 Rev ZE as car parking space shall be kept available for such use at all times and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking or re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on the land so shown (other than the erection of a car port) or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access thereto; such land and access thereto shall be provided prior to the occupation of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted.

Reason: Development without adequate provision for the parking or garaging of cars is likely to lead to car parking inconvenient to other road users.

(16B) No more than 50 dwellings in Phase 1 South shall be occupied until a pedestrian / cycle link has been provided – in accordance with a specification that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority – up to the boundary with the development site for application reference 18/500257/EIFUL (to connect with the path as shown on ‘Planning Layout’, drawing A759 01 Rev J) and in the vicinity of Plots 166 and 211 of the development hereby approved.

Reason: in the interests of promoting connectivity within the Local Plan allocation, particularly for non-car modes of travel.

(17B) No more than 80 dwellings in Phase 1 North shall be occupied until a pedestrian / cycle link has been provided – in accordance with a specification that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority – up to the boundary with the development site for application reference 19/501845/OUT and in the vicinity of Plots 346 to 348 of the development hereby approved.

Reason: in the interests of promoting connectivity within the Local Plan allocation and adjacent development sites, particularly for non-car modes of travel.

(18B) No dwelling in Phase 1 North shall be occupied until full details of the electric vehicle charging points as shown indicatively on drawing P1076_10 Sheet 1 Revision ZJ (which shall include details of the charge point specification, which shall be designed to utilise best available technology) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed details shall then be implemented for each house before the dwelling in question is first occupied.

Reason: in the interests of encouraging sustainable modes of transport and minimising the carbon footprint of the development.

(19B) No dwelling in Phase 1 South shall be occupied until full details of the electric vehicle charging points as shown indicatively on P1076_10 Sheet 2 Rev ZD (which shall include details of the charge point specification, which shall be designed to utilise best available technology) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning

Page 75 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Authority. The agreed details shall then be implemented for each dwelling before the dwelling in question is first occupied.

Reason: in the interests of encouraging sustainable modes of transport and minimising the carbon footprint of the development.

(20B) No development beyond the construction of foundations shall take place in a particular phase until details of tree protection measures for trees planted in that phase (other than those in rear gardens) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall then be implemented in full alongside the implementation of the tree planting itself.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and supporting biodiversity.

(21B) The dwellings hereby approved in Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South shall be constructed and tested to achieve the following measure: At least a 31% reduction in Dwelling Emission Rate compared to the Target Emission Rates as required under Part L1A of the Building Regulations 2013 (as amended);

No development shall take place in Phase 1 South or Phase 1 North until details of the measures to be undertaken to secure compliance with this condition have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of promoting energy efficiency and sustainable development.

(22B) Notwithstanding the details shown on drawing 2535-1S-LA-07 Revision P3, full details of the proposed play elements, the bench and a litter bin, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the occupation of the 20th dwelling in Phase 1 South. The agreed details shall then be fully implemented before the occupation of the 70th dwelling. The play elements, the litter bin and the bench shall then be retained in perpetuity.

Reason: In the interests of providing for informal play.

(23B) None of the dwellings in either Phase 1 North or Phase 1 South shall be occupied until a scheme setting out the details of water butts and garden compositing bins to be provided for each house has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved provision shall be implemented before the occupation of each house.

Reason: In the interest of minimising water consumption and waste generation.

(24B) The development hereby approved for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South shall include street lighting as specified on Spine Road Lighting and Tree Locations Phase 1 South (Sheets 1 and 2) and Phase 1 North (drawing numbers 2535-SK-16, 17 & 18) and the lighting shall be delivered in accordance with a programme that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring the delivery of appropriate street lighting.

(25B) No development in either Phase 1 North or Phase 1 South shall commence until a detailed lighting strategy for that phase in respect of the network of paths hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved lighting shall then be implemented in accordance with an implementation programme that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 76 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the path network is appropriately illuminated.

(26B) The development hereby approved for Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South shall accord with the principles of Secure by Design, and before development is commenced a scheme setting out how this will be achieved for each phase shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of minimising the opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour.

(27B) Prior to the occupation of the 50th dwelling in Phase 1 South, details (including an implementation programme) of one set of bus stops (ie two bus stops in total) and accompanying infrastructure which shall include appropriate shelters (to be located as close as reasonably possible to the Quinton Road entrance) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bus stops (and accompanying shelters) shall be delivered in accordance with the approved programme and shall be retained in perpetuity.

Reason: In the interest of promoting of sustainable modes of transport.

All development

(1C) The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

P.1076_15 D; P.1076_34 C; P.1076_10-3 V; P.1076_11-2 E; P.1076_10 SHEET NO: 1 REV: ZJ; P1076_10 Sheet 2 REV ZE; P1076_12 Sheet 1 REV V; P1076_12 Sheet 2 REV V; P.1076_12-2 V; P.1076_25-01 K; P.1076_25-2 L; P.1076_53-1; P.1076_53-2; P.1076_54-1; P.1076 54-2; P.1076_55 Rev 1; P.1076_14 A; P.1076_42 A (Sheets 1,2,3 and 4); P1076_60 (Sheet 1); P1076_60 (Sheet 2); and P.1076_59 (Sheets 1 and 2).

House Types North

P.1076_41 Sheet 1; P.1076_41-2; P.1076_41-3; P.1076_41-4; P.1076_41-5; P.1076_41-6; P.1076_41-7; P.1076_41-8 Rev A; P.1076_41-9; P.1076_41-10; P.1076_41-11; P.1076_41-12; P.1076_41-13; P.1076_41-14 Rev A; P.1076_41-15; P.1076_41-19 Rev A; P.1076_41-20; P.1076_41-21; P.1076_41-22; P.1076_41-23; P.1076_41-24; P.1076_41-25; P.1076_41-26; P.1076_41-27; P.1076_41-28; P.1076_41- 29; P.1076_41-30; P.1076_41-31; P.1076_41-32; and P.1076_41-33.

Dwelling Types South

P.1076_40 Sheet 1 Rev A; P.1076_40 Sheet 10 Rev A; P.1076_40-11 Rev A; P.1076_40- 12 Rev A; P.1076_40-13 Rev A; P.1076_40-14 Rev A; P.1076_40-15 Rev A; P.1076_40- 16 Rev B; P.1076_40-17 Rev B; P.1076_40-18 Rev A; P.1076_40-19 Rev A; P.1076_40- 2 Rev A; P.1076_40-20 Rev A; P.1076_40-21 Rev A; P.1076_40-22 Rev A; P.1076_40- 23 Rev A; P.1076_40-24 Rev A; P.1076_40-26 Rev A; P.1076_40-27 Rev A; P.1076_40- 3 Rev A; P.1076_40-30 Rev A; P.1076_40-31 Rev A; P.1076_40-32 Rev A; P.1076_40- 33 Rev A; P.1076_40-34 Rev A; P.1076_40-35 Rev A; P.1076_40-36 Rev A; P.1076_40- 37 Rev A; P.1076_40-4 Rev A; P.1076_40-5 Rev A; P.1076_40-50 Rev D; P.1076_40-51 Rev D; P.1076_40-52 Rev D; P.1076_40-53 Rev D; P.1076_40-54 Rev D; P.1076_40-55 Rev D; P.1076_40-56 Rev D; P.1076_40-6 Rev A; P.1076_40-60 Rev E; P.1076_40-61 Rev E; P.1076_40-62 Rev E; P.1076_40-63 Rev E; P.1076_40-64 Rev E; P.1076_40-65 Rev D; P.1076_40-7 Rev A; P.1076_40-70 Rev C; P.1076_40-71 Rev C; P.1076_40-72 Rev C; P.1076_40-73 Rev C; P.1076_40-74 Rev B; P.1076_40-75 Rev B; P.1076_40-76

Page 77 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Rev B; P.1076_40-8 Rev A; P.1076_40-80 Rev C; P.1076_40-81 Rev C; P.1076_40-82 Rev C; P.1076_83 Rev B; P.1076_84 Rev B; P.1076_85 Rev B; and P.1076_40-9 Rev A.

10298_1101 P1; 10298_1102; 1131 P10; 1132 P9; 1151 P2; 1152 P2; 1601 P6; 1602 P6; 1603 P6; 1604 P6; 1604 P6; 1605 P6; 1606 P6; 1607 P6; 1801 P7; 1802 P7; 1803 P7; 1804 P7; 1805 P8; 1806 P8; 1807 P7; 1951 P8; 1952 P6; 1953 P1; 1954 P1; 1121; 10298_1122; 2535-SK-16, -17 and -18; ASD-SE-SL-2019-041-01 DWG R1; ASD-SE-SL- 2019-041-02 DWG; ASD-SE-SL-2019-041-RES-01-RO DWG; ASD-SE-SL-2019-041- RES-02-RO DWG; ASD-SE-SL-2019-041-RES-03-RO DWG;

2535-LA-02 P6; 2535-LA-03 P5; 2535-1N-PP-01 P5; 2535-1N-PP-02 P5; 2535-1N-PP-03 P5; 2535-1N-PP-04 P5; 2535-1N-PP-05 P5; 2535-1S-PP-01 P4; 2535-1S-PP-02 P4; 2535-1S-PP-03 P4; 2535-1S-PP-04 P4; 2535-1S-PP-05 P4; 2535-1S-PP-06 P4; 2535- 1S-PP-07 P4; 2535-1S-PP-08 P4; 2535-1S-LA-01 P3; 2535-1S-LA-02 P3; 2535-1S-LA- 03 P3; 2535-1S-LA-04 P3; 2535-1S-LA-05 P3; 2535-1S-LA-06 P3; 2535-1S-LA-07 P3; and 2535-1S-LA-07 P3;

27239_5504_021 Rev G; D118/12 Rev C; 27239_5504_057 A; 27239_5504_060 A.

Reason: In the interests of proper planning

(2C) With the exception of infrastructure works undertaken under a Temporary Footpath Closure Order, where the existing Public Right of Way will be reinstated, no development shall take place over the alignment of Public Footpath ZU54/ZR110/ZU6 until an Order for its permanent diversion has been confirmed.

Reason: In order to protect and enhance connections to and through the existing public right of way.

(3C) No development shall take place over the alignment of Public Footpath ZU54/ZR110/ZU6 until details of the proposed surfacing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall then be implemented in accordance with a programme that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity and safety of the public.

(4C) No works (including site clearance and/or preparation) shall commence on any phase of the development hereby permitted until a Construction Management Plan (CMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that phase.

The CMP shall include the following:

(a) Routing of construction and delivery vehicles; (b) Parking and turning areas for construction and delivery vehicles and site personnel; (c) Timing of deliveries; (d) Provision of wheel washing facilities; (e) Temporary traffic management / signage; (f) Any requirements for temporary construction access, loading and unloading of plant and materials; (g) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; (h) The erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (i) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction (j) measures to control noise during construction; and

Page 78 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(k) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works Site security measures.

The construction of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan(s) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area.

(5C) No occupation of any dwellings that would be accessed via Grovehurst Road shall take place until the highways works as shown on plan D118/12 Rev C (‘Grovehurst Road Site Access’) have been completed in accordance with a Section 278 agreement that shall first have been entered into with KCC Highways and Transportation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

(6C) No occupation of any dwellings that would be accessed from Quinton Road (including all dwellings in Phase 1 South) shall take place until the highways works as indicatively shown on plan 27239_5504_021 REV G, with the addition of a Toucan Crossing facility, have been completed in accordance with a Section 278 agreement that shall first have been entered into with KCC Highways and Transportation unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

(7C) Prior to the occupation of any dwelling or other building hereby approved, secure, covered cycle parking facilities shall be provided for the dwelling or building in accordance with the Council's adopted parking standards (‘Parking Standards’, May 2020), and the facilities shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to facilitate the use of alternative, non-car means of transport in accordance with Policy.

(8C) Prior to the occupation of any dwelling or other building hereby approved, the following works between the dwelling or building and the adopted highway shall be provided:

(a) Footways and/or footpaths, with the exception of the wearing course; (b) Carriageways, with the exception of the wearing course but including a turning facility, highway drainage, visibility splays, street lighting, street nameplates and highway structures (if any); and (c) A timescale for completion of the wearing course in the event that any carriageway or footway is not adopted by the local highway authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety

(9C) Prior to the occupation of the 50th dwelling in Phase 1 South, the off-site highways works relating to the Quinton Road to Sittingbourne Town Centre cycle route (as indicatively shown on plans 27239/5504/066, 27239/5504/067, 27239/5504/068 and 27239/5504/072) shall have been completed in accordance with a Section 278 agreement that shall first have been entered into with KCC Highways and Transportation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and promotion of sustainable modes of transport.

Page 79 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(10C) The footpath / cycle path between Bramblefield Lane and Quinton Road (running through the site and as illustrated on the Concept Masterplan, P1076_18Q) shall be open and available for public use (in accordance with details that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) on or before the opening of the Secondary School or the occupation of the 250th dwelling, whichever is the sooner.

Reason: In the interest of promoting of sustainable modes of transport.

(11C) Prior to the occupation of the 1st dwelling in any phase other than Phase 1 South or Phase 1 North, details (including an implementation programme) of one set of bus stops (ie two bus stops in total) and accompanying infrastructure which shall include appropriate shelters (to be in close proximity to the school and central square) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bus stops (and accompanying shelters) shall be delivered in accordance with the approved programme and shall be retained in perpetuity.

Reason: In the interest of promoting of sustainable modes of transport.

(12C) The proposed roads, footways, footpaths, verges, junctions, street lighting, sewers, drains, retaining walls, service routes, surface water outfall, vehicle overhang margins, embankments, visibility splays, accesses, carriageway gradients, driveway gradients, car parking and street furniture to be laid out and constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The relevant details for each phase shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of construction in that phase.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety.

(13C) Prior to either the first opening of either school or occupation of the 100th dwelling (whichever is sooner), the length of the Spine Road (as shown on drawing P1076_10-1 Rev ZJ and on indicatively on the Concept Masterplan drawing P1076-18Q), between the school and Grovehurst Road shall be open and available for public use, and shall be to a standard that has been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety.

(14C) Prior to the occupation of the 345th dwelling, an application for the approval of reserved matters (pursuant to condition (1A) above) in respect of the section of the Spine Road between the Phase 1 North and Phase 1 South reserved matters areas shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety.

(15C) Prior to the occupation of the 780th dwelling, the full extent of the Spine Road between the junction with Grovehurst Road and Quinton Road, as indicatively shown on the Concept Masterplan drawing P1076-18Q and elsewhere, shall be open and available for public use and to a standard as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety

(16C) Prior to the opening of either of the schools hereby approved, a temporary pedestrian/cycle link shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, between the Phase 1 South site and

Page 80 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

the school site entrance, and the approved path shall be retained until such time as a permanent replacement has been provided.

Reason: In the interest of promoting sustainable transport choices.

(17C) Prior to the occupation of the 200th dwelling on the development hereby approved, the Kemsley Halt pedestrian/cycle link as indicatively shown on the Concept Masterplan drawing P1076-18P (and including the link on to the station platform) shall be open and available to the public and shall be in accordance with a specification (including siting, width, surfacing details, landscape planting and boundary treatment) that shall have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of promoting sustainable transport choices.

(18C) No more than 41 dwellings hereby approved shall be occupied until the Highway Authority have awarded a contract for works to deliver the HIF (Highway Infrastructure Fund) improvement scheme or otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority that there is sufficient capacity on the highway to avoid any severe impacts on highway safety or capacity at that time.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety

(19C) No more than 91 dwellings hereby approved shall be occupied until such a time as the opening to the public of a Roads Investment Strategy scheme at M2 Junction 5 and a Housing Infrastructure Fund scheme at the A249 Grovehurst junction (or schemes to the same effect that may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority).

Reason: To ensure that the A249 Trunk Road and M2 Junction 5 continue to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with section 10 of the Highways Act 1980 and to satisfy the reasonable requirements of road safety.

(20C) No more than 100 dwellings within Phase 1 South shall be occupied until an interim highway improvement scheme for the A249/Bobbing interchange is open and available for public use and to a specification that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, any such scheme must include pedestrian crossing facilities for the southbound off-slip road as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: in the interests of highway safety.

(21C) No more than 450 dwellings shall be occupied until the proposed full mitigation for the Bobbing/A249 junction as indicatively shown on drawing 27239_5504_029 i open and available for public use and the scheme must include pedestrian crossing facilities for the Northbound on-slip and to a standard as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety

(22C) No more than the 91 dwellings proposed for Phase 1 North and the 257 dwellings proposed for Phase 1 South shall be occupied until such time as either the Spine Road has been provided to allow vehicular access to the dwellings from the Northern access point onto Grovehurst Road or the full mitigation scheme for the Bobbing/A249 junction has been completed and is open to the public.

Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety.

Page 81 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(23C) Prior to the commencement of works in connection with either of the schools hereby approved, the construction access to the school site shall be provided in accordance with details and a programme that shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: in the interests of highway safety.

(24C) No surface water shall be permitted to run off from the development hereby permitted on to the highway or into any drainage system connected to the highway. No drainage connections from any non-Strategic Road Network related development hereby permitted may be made to any Strategic Road Network drainage systems.

Reason: To ensure that the A249 Trunk Road and M2 Junction 5 continue to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with section 10 of the Highways Act 1980 and to satisfy the reasonable requirements of road safety.

(25C) Notwithstanding the submitted Framework Travel Plan (April 2018), no part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a Framework Travel Plan(s) covering the whole development has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter detailed Travel Plans (TPs) for the various phases (including the two schools and all the housing parcels) of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the first occupation of any building in the phase in question is commenced. The requirements of the TPs shall then be adhered to throughout the lifetime of the development.

Reason: In the interests of encouraging non-car modes of travel and, among other things, to ensure that the A249 Trunk Road and M2 Junction 5 continue to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with section 10 of the Highways Act 1980 and to satisfy the reasonable requirements of road safety.

(26C) No works to prepare the land for and/or construct the acoustic bund shall commence until a Statement of Intent to include a Preliminary Sources Study Report and Ground Investigation Scope Report and undertaken in line with the requirements of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges standard CD622 ‘Managing geotechnical risk’, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the acoustic bund is designed and constructed in a way which protects the integrity of the A249 and its drainage, to ensure that the A249 continues to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with section 10 of the Highways Act 1980 and to satisfy the reasonable requirements of road safety.

(27C) No works to prepare the land for and/or construct the acoustic bund shall commence until a Ground Investigation Report and Geotechnical Design Report which is undertaken in line with the requirements of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges standard CD622 ‘Managing geotechnical risk’, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the acoustic bund is designed and constructed in a way which protects the integrity of the A249 and its drainage, to ensure that the A249 continues to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with section 10 of the Highways Act 1980 and to satisfy the reasonable requirements of road safety.

Page 82 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(28C) In respect of each phase of the development hereby approved, all hard and soft landscape works that has been approved for that phase shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development in that phase or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in respect of the phase.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and encouraging biodiversity.

(29C) Upon completion of the approved landscaping scheme for a particular phase of the development (including the Country Park, other open space and strategic landscaped areas, the Schools Site and the Local Centre), any trees or shrubs that are removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting within that phase shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, and within whatever planting season is agreed.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and encouraging biodiversity.

(30C) If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, LPA) within that phase shall be carried out until a remediation strategy detailing how this contamination will be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of water pollution from previously unidentified contamination sources at the development site in line with paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

(31C) No development approved by this permission shall be commenced, within a particular phase, until a scheme for the provision and implementation of foul drainage works within that phase has been approved by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall then be implemented in accordance with an agreed programme.

Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of water pollution from previously unidentified contamination sources at the development site in line with paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

(32C) Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: The site overlies an aquifer and is partly within a Source Protection Zone (SPZ). Without this condition, the proposed development on this site poses an unacceptable risk to local water quality.

(33C) Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A, Part 2, Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) no gates, fences, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or provided in advance of any wall or any dwelling fronting on a highway.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

Page 83 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(34C) No development approved by this permission shall be commenced in a particular phase prior to a contaminated land assessment (and associated remediation strategy if relevant), being submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, comprising:

a) A desk study and conceptual model, based on the historical uses of the site and proposed end-uses, and professional opinion as to whether further investigative works are required. A site investigation strategy, based on the results of the desk study, shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to any intrusive investigations commencing on site. b) An investigation, including relevant soil, soil gas, surface and groundwater sampling, carried out by a suitably qualified and accredited consultant/contractor in accordance with a Quality Assured sampling and analysis methodology. c) A site investigation report detailing all investigative works and sampling on site, together with the results of analyses, risk assessment to any receptors and a proposed remediation strategy which shall be of such a nature as to render harmless the identified contamination given the proposed end-use of the site and surrounding environment, including any controlled waters.

Reason: To ensure any land contamination is adequately dealt with.

(35C) Before any part or agreed phase of the development is occupied, all remediation works identified in the contaminated land assessment and approved by the Local Planning Authority for that phase shall be carried out in full (or in phases as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) on site under a quality assured scheme to demonstrate compliance with the proposed methodology and best practice guidance. If, during the works, contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified, then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure any land contaminated is adequately dealt with.

(36C) Upon completion of the works identified in the contaminated land assessment for a particular phase, and before any part or agreed phase of the development is occupied, a closure report shall be submitted which shall include details of the proposed remediation works with quality assurance certificates to show that the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved methodology for that phase. Details of any post- remediation 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.

Reason: To ensure any contaminated land is adequately dealt with.

(37C) The developer must advise the Local Planning Authority of the measures that will be undertaken to protect the public sewers and water mains, prior to the commencement of the development. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of minimising the risk of damage to water industry infrastructure.

(38C) Development on each phase of 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 for each respective parcel compliant with the principles as outlined in the Drainage Strategy Overview Drawing (GTA Civils, November 2019). The

Page 84 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

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 without increase to flood risk on or off-site (and, among other things, that surface water from the site is attenuated to a rate of no more than 7 litres per second per hectare). 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.

Provision for phased development Development shall not begin until a phasing plan for the surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to (and approved in writing by) the Local Planning Authority and which demonstrates the provision of drainage network to serve any designated Phase 1 or subsequent phases prior to occupation. The phasing plan shall also indicate and provide details of any temporary works associated with the construction of the surface water drainage system.

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.

(39C) No building on any phase (or within an agreed implementation schedule) of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a Verification Report, pertaining to the surface water drainage system and prepared by a suitably competent person, has been submitted to (and approved by) the Local Planning Authority. The Report shall demonstrate the suitable modelled operation of the drainage system where the system constructed is different to that approved. The Report shall contain information and evidence (including photographs) of details and locations of inlets, outlets and control structures; landscape plans; full as built drawings; information pertinent to the installation of those items identified on the critical drainage assets drawing; and the submission of an operation and maintenance manual for the sustainable 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, and to ensure that the development as constructed is compliant with and subsequently maintained pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 165 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

(40C) 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 and ensure compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 85 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(41C) No development in Phase 1 South beyond the construction of foundations shall take place until a train horn noise mitigation scheme (including an implementation programme) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed mitigation shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved programme.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and mitigating potential adverse noise impacts associated with the operation of the adjacent railway line.

(42C) The development hereby approved shall be built out in accordance with a phasing plan for the entire development that shall first have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring that the development is built out in coherent manner in accordance with an agreed sequence of phases and to minimise impact on traffic flow on the existing road network.

(43C) The details submitted pursuant to condition (1) above, shall show all built development set back from the High-Pressure Gas Pipeline by a minimum of nine metres.

Reason: In the interest of health and safety.

(44C) Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A, Part 2, Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) no gates, fences, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or provided in advance of any wall or any dwelling fronting on a highway or public area.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(45C) No gas boilers shall be fitted in the dwellings hereby permitted other than a low emission boiler of a minimum standard of <40mgNOx/kWh. No dwellings shall be occupied until details of the boilers to be installed have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the development shall be carried out in accordance with such details.

Reason: In the interests of minimising air quality impacts.

(46C) No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of:

• 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 • Following on from the evaluation, any safeguarding measures to ensure preservation in situ of important archaeological remains and/or further archaeological investigation and recording in accordance with a specification and timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure appropriate assessment of the archaeological implications of any development proposals and the subsequent mitigation of adverse impacts through preservation in situ or by record.

(47C) The details submitted in respect of condition (1A) above, shall in respect of any phase that could affect the World War One defences of the Chatham Land Front as illustrated on the Concept Masterplan (drawing number P_1076_18Q) include full details of any Safeguarding Measures to preserve important archaeological remains or deposits in situ.

Page 86 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

These Safeguarding Measures shall be informed by the results of an Archaeological Field Evaluation Report and will first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such Safeguarding Measures may include the identification of areas of the site where development will be excluded to preserve the remains of the defences and their setting. The agreed safeguarding will include measures for the on-going safeguarding and management of any preserved archaeological remains and shall inform the siting and layout of any development proposals.

Reason: To secure the appropriate safeguarding of important heritage assets, namely the World War One defences of the Chatham Land Front.

(48C) The details submitted in respect of condition (1A) above, shall in respect of any phase that would affect the World War One defences of the Chatham Land Front as illustrated on the Concept Masterplan (drawing number P_1076_18Q) include a scheme of historical interpretation of the World War One defences of the Chatham Land Front. Examples of how to relay and interpret the archaeology and history of the site can include, but are not limited to, the use of materials, landscaping, public art and the provision of historical interpretation boards. The details submitted pursuant to this condition shall include location, design, dimensions and materials of any fixed interpretation and a timetable for their implementation. The interpretation scheme shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details and timetable and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the development makes a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness, through historical interpretation, in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework

(49C) No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until a survey has been carried out to establish the current condition of the boundary treatment where the site adjoins the railway corridor along the eastern boundary. The survey results shall then inform a scheme for the upgrade (and where appropriate replacement) of the existing boundary treatment in order to ensure a secure boundary is achieved. The scheme, which shall first have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be implemented before any of the dwellings hereby approved (other than those in Phase 1 North) are first occupied.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring a secure boundary with the adjacent railway line.

(50C) No construction activities shall take place other than between 0730 to 1900 hours (Monday to Friday) and 0730 to 1300 hours (Saturday) with no working activities on Sunday or Bank Holiday.

Reason: In the interests of surrounding residential amenity.

(51C) No impact pile driving in connection with the construction of the development shall take place on the site on any Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor any other day except between the following times:

Monday to Friday 0900-1700hours unless in association with an emergency or with the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Page 87 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

(52C) Prior to the development commencing (including vegetation clearance) in any phase a detailed reptile mitigation strategy must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval in respect of that phase. The strategy must include the following: • Updated reptile survey • Map showing the location of the receptor site • Details of how the receptor site will be protected during works • Details of how the receptor site will be established • Details of what condition the receptor site will have to be in prior to the translocation commencing • Translocation methodology • Timing of the proposed works. • Details of who will be carrying out the works. • Simple management plan for the receptor site prior to the implementation of a site wide management plan.

The strategy must be implemented as detailed within the approved plan for the phase in question.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding reptile populations within the site.

(53C) Prior to any works being carried out on any trees within a phase of the development hereby approved a bat scoping and climbing survey (and where required emergence surveys) must be carried out for that phase. The results of the surveys must inform the detailed methodology to remove the trees within the phase in question. The results of the bat surveys and mitigation strategies must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing by them before the works commence in the relevant phase. The works must then be carried out in accordance with the approved details for the relevant phase.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding bat populations within the site.

(54C) Within three months of construction commencing on a residential phase of the development hereby approved a detailed lighting strategy (informed by the bat activity surveys) must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for written approval in respect of that phase. The lighting scheme shall: a) Identify those areas/features on site that are particularly sensitive for bats and that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their breeding sites and resting places or along important routes used to access key areas of their territory; b) Show how, where and what external lighting will be installed so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent the above species using their territory.

All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the strategy and these shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the strategy.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding bat populations within the site.

(55C) The residential elements of the development hereby permitted shall be designed to achieve a water consumption rate of no more than 110 litres per person per day, and no residential unit(s) shall be occupied until details of the measures used to achieve the rate for that unit(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Page 88 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Reason: In the interests of minimising domestic water consumption.

(56C) Before development commences details shall be submitted for the installation of fixed telecommunication infrastructure and High-Speed Fibre Optic (minimal internal speed of 1000mb) connections to multi point destinations and all buildings including residential, commercial and community. The infrastructure installed in accordance with the approved details during the construction of the development, capable of connection to commercial broadband providers and maintained in accordance with approved details.

Reason: To provide high quality digital infrastructure in new developments as required by paragraph 112 NPPF.

APPENDIX

Landscape and Ecology Management Plan - Framework (October 2020)

Page 89 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

INFORMATIVES

Informative A: (dwelling details)

The sections to be provided shall include part of the surrounding masonry or joinery bordering the window or door opening and shall be set out clearly (annotated as necessary) to show the following details, as applicable:

• Depth of reveal • Window head and cill/sub-cill detailing • Glazing section (thickness of glass and in case of double glazing, dimension of spacing between the panes of glass) • Glazing bar profile(s) in relation to the glazing section (showing whether through glazing bars, or stick on bars with spacers between the glazing) • Window frame

The elevation detail to be provided shall clearly show the parts of the window which are openable, and the direction(s) in which they open and close.

For a scheme with multiple buildings, the relevant drawing for a particular window design shall also be provided with an associated schedule showing which buildings/plots it is to be used on.

The other key information which must be supplied is as follows:

• Confirmation of the material(s) the window, window frame and any cill (internal and external) are to be manufactured from • Confirmation of the RAL colour(s) to be used for the timber, metal and/or uPVC surfaces • Where the windows to be used are not custom made for the approved scheme, details of the relevant window manufacturer (company name, telephone number and web site address) together with the name of the specific product range and model(s) to be used. • Where the windows to be used are not custom made, details of any specific optional choices to be made for each window type (e.g. visible or hidden trickle vents, visible joint detailing for uPVC windows and cill dimensions). The relevant options specified should be shown on the large scale elevation and sectional drawings to be provided for each window type

Whilst the applicant may choose to submit manufacturer brochures and/or specification sheets in relation to this planning condition, the local planning authority will not be able to fully discharge this condition until all of the specific information required by this condition has been supplied by the applicant, and the local planning authority is satisfied that it shows an appropriate standard of design and associated detailing.

Informative B: (dwelling details)

In relation to the porch roofs, the Local Planning Authority expects to see a bedded verge design, and in relation to the eaves detailing for the main roofs, it expects to see an open verge design.

Informative C: (Southern Water)

Development should not be permitted to be occupied until such time as adequate capacity is available to serve the development. Southern Water advises that the development shall not be occupied until adequate sewerage capacity is available, through the completion of the programmed works. The applicant is advised to discuss the matter further with Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire SO21 2SW (Tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk”.

Page 90 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Informative D: (Southern Water)

A formal application for connection to the water supply 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. Attention is drawn to the Southern Water (SWS) consultation response dated 12 June 2018 and the applicant is advised to liaise with SWS in order to ensure that their requirements in respect of this application are satisfied.

Informative E: (Broadband request from KCC)

It is recommended 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. Access to superfast broadband should be thought of as an essential utility for all new homes and businesses and given the same importance as water or power in any development design. 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. KCC understand that major telecommunication providers are now offering Next Generation Access Broadband connections free of charge to the developer. For advice on how to proceed with providing access to superfast.

Informative F:(Breeding Birds)

The applicant is reminded that, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended (section 1), it is an offence to remove, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built. Planning consent for a development does not provide a defence against prosecution under this act. Trees, scrub, hedgerows and buildings are likely to contain nesting birds between 1st March and 31st August inclusive. Vegetation is present on the application site and are to be assumed to contain nesting birds between the above dates, unless a recent survey has been undertaken by a competent ecologist to assess the nesting bird activity on site during this period and has shown it is absolutely certain that nesting birds are not present.

The Council’s approach to the application

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) February 2019, the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. We work with applicants/agents in a positive and creative way by offering a pre- application advice service, where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome and as appropriate, updating applicants / agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

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 91 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

Page 92 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

North West Sittingbourne

Reference: 18/502190/EIHYB

Landscape & Ecology Management Plan - Framework

October 2020

Page 93 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

Contents

1. Introduction Pg. 3

2. Landscape and Ecology Management Structure Pg. 5

3. Landscape and Ecology Management Typologies Pg. 6

4. Community & Stakeholder Involvement Mechanisms Pg. 8

5. Ecology Monitoring Pg. 9

6. Implementation Pg. 10

Appendix 1 – Typologies Plan

2 Page 94 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

1. Introduction

1.1 This document has been prepared by Persimmon Homes in support of their hybrid planning application reference 18/502190/EIHYB for:

Full Planning Application - Phase 1 North - Erection of 91 dwellings accessed from Grovehurst Road, public open and amenity space (including an equipped children's play area) together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration basins and tanked permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works.

Full Planning Application - Phase 1 South - Erection of 257 dwellings (including 34 35 affordable dwellings) accessed from Quinton Road, public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration swales, ring soakaways, and permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works.

Outline Planning Application - for up to 852 new dwellings (including 10% affordable housing), a site of approximately 10 ha for a secondary and primary school, a mixed use local centre, including land for provision of a convenience store, public open and amenity space (including equipped children's play areas), together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station and sustainable drainage systems), utilities and service infrastructure. All matters reserved.

At Land North Quinton Road Sittingbourne Kent ME10 2SX, hereafter referred to as ‘the Site’.

1.2 This document comprises a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan Framework for the Site, hereafter referred to as the ‘Framework’ and is intended to provide a comprehensive approach to the management of all public areas within the Site.

1.3 The approach set out in this Framework will apply to all public areas of landscaping and open space within the scheme.

1.4 This Framework sets out the following:

• Firstly, the landscape and ecology ‘management structure’ that will apply to the site over the multi-phase build out and thereafter during the operation of the development;

• Secondly, the different landscape and ecology ‘management typologies’ that are proposed within the scheme around which the management regime will be defined;

3 Page 95 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

• Thirdly, the approach to stakeholder involvement;

• Fourthly, the approach to monitoring and review;

• Finally, summarise the approach that will be taken to securing the landscape and management approach through the planning permission.

4 Page 96 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

2. Landscape and Ecology Management Structure

Outline Landscape & Ecology Management Plan

2.1 The entire site will be subject to an overarching Outline Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (OLEMP), this will set out the high level management objectives and strategy.

2.2 Specifically the OLEMP will set out strategy for how the measures identified in the ‘Ecological and Enhancement Management Plan’ (September 2018) will be delivered.

2.3 The OLEMP will be secured by way of planning condition. The OLEMP will be required to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation.

Detailed Landscape & Ecology Management Plan

2.4 The OLEMP will then be supplemented by Detailed Landscape and Ecology Management Plans (DLEMP).

2.5 The DLEMP will set out the detailed management measures for the site and will be prepared on a phased basis. The DLEMP will be prepared with reference to the approved layout and landscaping details and any detailed ecological requirements for each respective phase.

2.6 The DLEMP will be secured by way of planning condition prior to the occupation of each phase. The first iteration of the DLEMP will relate to Phase 1 North and South only. The DLEMP will then be reveiwed and updated as each subsequent phase comes forward.

2.7 Prior to the first occupation of the final phase the final iteration DLEMP will be approved and will apply to the site in perpetuity.

5 Page 97 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

3. Landscape and Ecology Management Typologies

3.1 The (public) landscape and open space areas fall within one of four ‘management typologies’. Each typology has a different purpose, thereby has different management objective and will require different management regimes.

3.2 The management typology areas for the entire site are indicatively shown on the plan included at Appendix 1 (below). The extant of these areas will be defined in detail as part of the phased DLEMP. Please note that not all management typologies will be present within each phase.

Highways Authority Adopted Areas 3.3 These areas of hard and soft landscaping within the urban environment which will be adopted by the Highways Authority (byway of either a Section 38 Agreement or a Section 278 Agreement). These areas will be designed and built in accordance with adoption standards. The purpose of these areas (both hard and soft) is primarily visual amenity and interest within the urban environment, but these areas will also have a secondary ecological function. Prior to adoption these areas will be maintained by Persimmon Homes. Once adopted these areas will be publically maintained by the Highways Authority at their expense.

3.4 Given that these areas will be the responsibility of the Highways Authority the DLEMP will not be able to control their maintenance and management arrangements. As such the DLEMP will not set out any details for the management and maintenance of these areas post adoption. The DLEMP will set out measures for the management and maintenance of these area prior to adoption.

Neighbourhood Landscaped Areas 3.5 These are areas within the urban environment which are not adopted by the Highways Authority. The purpose of these areas (both hard and soft) is primarily visual amenity and interest within the urban environment, but these areas will also have a secondary ecological function.

3.6 Prior to completion of a phase these areas will be maintained by Persimmon Homes. Once the phases is completed these areas will be transferred to a Management Company, who will then be responsible for maintenance in accordance with approved DLEMP which will paid for by a residents charge.

3.7 The management regime for the Neighbourhood Landscaped Areas will be consistent across all phases.

Recreational and Amenity Open Space Areas 3.8 These are areas of open space which primarily have a recreational and amenity function. These areas will include: Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP); the Local Areas for Play (LAP); the informal kick about area; any footpaths and cycleway corridors through the site. These areas will also have a secondary ecological function.

6 Page 98 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

3.9 Prior to completion of a phase these areas will be maintained by Persimmon Homes. Once the phases is completed these areas will be transferred to a Management Company, who will then be responsible for maintenance in accordance with approved DLEMP which will paid for by a residents charge.

3.10 The management regime for the Recreational and Amenity Open Space Areas will be consistent across all phases.

Green Infrastructure Ecology Areas 3.11 These area areas of open space and landscaping which will be primarily designed and delivered to encourage and promote ecology. These includes the parts of the site with existing ecological features that are being retained and enhanced such as: the watercourse corridor that bisects the site; existing trees and hedgerows along field boundaries. This area will also include areas where new habitat are being created including SUDS basins and the Country Park (excluding those parts that are primarily for recreational purposes). The areas will also have a secondary amenity and recreational function. Prior to completion of a phase these areas will be maintained by Persimmon Homes. Once the phases is completed these areas will be transferred to a Management Company, who will then be responsible for maintenance in accordance with approved DLEMP which will paid for by a residents charge.

3.12 The management regime for the Green Infrastructure Ecology Areas will be area specific and will be prepared with detailed input of an ecologist to ensure that the existing and proposed habitats are properly managed in perpetuity.

7 Page 99 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

4. Community & Stakeholder Involvement Mechanisms

4.1 As part of the proposed landscape and ecology management approach a robust community and stakeholder involvement mechanisms will be put in place in the form of a ‘Landscape & Ecology Management Committee’, details below:

• The committee will monitor and review the performance of the management company with reference to the LEMP;

• The committee will be established prior to the completion of the first phase of development;

• The committee will comprise representatives from:

o Borough Council o Kent County Council (streets maintenance and ecology teams) o Kent Wildlife Trust

• The committee will meet publically with the Management Company twice annually (residents will be notified of the meeting and be invited to attend);

• As necessary the committee will make recommendations to the Management Company concerning the implementation of the LEMP; and

• The Management Company will be required to report upon the implementation of the LEMP over the previous 6 months, including the delivery of any recommendation previously made.

4.2 The LEMP committee will thereby provide a strong mechanism through which the delivery of the LEMP can be controlled by the community and key stakeholders, to ensure that landscape and ecology objectives set out in the document are realised in perpetuity.

8 Page 100 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

5. Ecology Monitoring

5.1 Closely linked to the mechanism for stakeholder and community involvement will be a programme of ecology monitoring.

5.2 Monitoring will be undertaken for the Green Infrastructure Ecology Area to assess the condition of the existing and proposed habitats and the performance of the management regimes.

5.3 The monitoring regimes will be prepared with input from the project ecologist and will be set out in the DLEMP.

5.4 The monitoring will be undertaken in accordance with the monitoring programme set out in the DLEMP. The monitoring will be undertaken by ecologists appointed and funded by Persimmon Homes.

5.5 The monitoring will be submitted to the Council and the LEMP committee.

5.6 Where necessary amendments to management regime will be recommended via the LEMP committee and incorporated in the next iteration of the DLEMP.

9 Page 101 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

6. Implementation

6.1 This LEMP Framework will be approved as part of the planning permission.

6.2 The requirement for submission of a site wide OLEMP and phased DLEMP will be required by condition (with reference made to this approved ‘LEMP Framework’).

6.3 The requirements for the site wide OLEMP and phased DLEMP, including the LEMP committee and the ecology monitoring, will also be set out in the Section 106 Agreement.

10 Page 102 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 1 – Management Typologies Plan

11 Page 103 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 2

Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA)i Screening Matrix and Appropriate Assessment (AA) Statement

IMPORTANT NOTE: Undertaking the HRA process is the responsibility of the decision maker as the Competent Authority for the purpose of the Habitats Regulations1. However, it is the responsibility of the applicant to provide the Competent Authority with the information required to complete this process.

Application reference: 18/502190/EIHYB Application address: Land north of Quinton Road, Sittingbourne Application description: Phase 1 North - Erection of 91 dwellings accessed from Grovehurst Road, public open and amenity space (including an equipped children's play area) together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration basins and tanked permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works. Full Planning Application - Phase 1 South - Erection of 257 dwellings (including 35 affordable dwellings) accessed from Quinton Road, public open and amenity space, together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including infiltration swales, ring soakaways, and permeable paving), utilities and service infrastructure works. Outline Planning Application - for up to 852 new dwellings (including 10% affordable housing), a site of approximately 10 ha for a secondary and primary school, a mixed use local centre, including land for provision of a convenience store, public open and amenity space (including equipped children's play areas), together with associated landscaping and ecological enhancement works, acoustic barrier to the A249, internal access roads, footpaths, cycleways and parking, drainage (including a foul water pumping station and sustainable drainage systems), utilities and service infrastructure. All matters reserved. Lead Planning Officer: Jim Wilson HRA Date: 13/1/2021

Part 1 – Details of the plan or project

European site or sites potentially impacted Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA and Ramsar

1 All references in this document to the ‘Habitats Regulations’ refer to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 Page 105 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 2 by planning application, plan or project Site (Delete as appropriate): Thames Estuary & Marshes SPA and Ramsar Site The Swale SPA and Ramsar Site Is the planning application directly No connected to the management of the site?

Part 2 – HRA Screening Assessment

Screening under Regulation 63(1)(a) of the Habitats Regulations – The Applicant should provide evidence to allow a judgement to be made as to whether there could be any potential significant impacts of the development on the integrity of the SPA / Ramsar Site. The coastline of North Kent encompasses three Special Protection Areas (SPAs): the Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA, the Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA and the Swale SPA. They are classified in accordance with the European Birds Directive which requires Member States to classify sites that are important for bird species listed on Annex 1 of the European Directive, which are rare and / or vulnerable in a European context, and also sites that form a critically important network for birds on migration. All three sites are also listed as Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention (Ramsar Sites). For clarity, and the purpose of this assessment, ‘European Sites’ refers to both the SPA(s) and Ramsar2 Site(s). Studies have shown marked declines in key bird species, particularly in areas that are busiest with recreational activity.

Research3 conducted in 2011 found that additional dwellings were likely to result in additional recreational activity, causing disturbance to protected bird species that over-winter or breed on the SPA and Ramsar Site. The studies found that 75% of recreational visitors to the North Kent coast originate from within 6km of the SPA boundary and Ramsar Site. The impacts of recreational disturbance can be such that they affect the status and distribution of key bird species and therefore act against the stated conservation objectives of the European sites.

Following the CJEU ruling4, avoidance or mitigation measures cannot be taken into account as part of the application at this stage of the HRA, and must be considered under an Appropriate Assessment stage of the HRA in part 3 of this document.

Are there any other plans or projects that Yes. All new dwellings built within 6km of the together with the planning application being SPA and Ramsar Site, or other developments assessed could result in a likely significant that could lead to an increased recreational effect the site when considered in- pressure, could combine to have a likely combination? significant effect on the SPA and Ramsar Site. Would the proposal lead to a likely significant effect on the European sites, without mitigation measures either alone or in-combination? YES (if yes, continue to part 3)

2 As a matter of Government Policy (NPPF Paragraph 18), Ramsar Sites should be given the same protection of European Sites. 3 Liley, D. & Fearnley, H. (2011). Bird Disturbance Study, North Kent 2010/11. Footprint Ecology 4 CJEU Ruling Case C-323/17 Page 106 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 2

Part 3 – Appropriate Assessment

Appropriate Assessment under Regulation 63(1) – if there are any potential significant impacts, the Applicant must provide evidence showing avoidance and/or mitigation measures to allow an Assessment to be made. The Applicant must also provide details which demonstrate any long-term management, maintenance and funding of any solution. The project being assessed would result in a net increase of 1200 dwellings within 6km of the North Kent SPAs and Ramsar Sites. In line with Policy CP7 ‘Conserving and enhancing the natural environment – providing for green infrastructure’ and Policy DM 28 ‘Biodiversity and geological conservation’ and based upon the best available evidence, a permanent likely significant effect on the SPAs and Ramsar Sites due to increase in recreational disturbance as a result of the new development, is likely to occur. As such, in order to avoid and mitigate for an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPAs and Ramsar Site(s), the development will need to include a package of avoidance and mitigation measures.

The North Kent Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy5 (SAMMS) sets out a strategy to resolve disturbance issues to wintering birds on the North Kent Marshes, focusing on the European Protected Sites and Ramsar Sites and their internationally important bird interest features. Elements within the strategy are: • Rangers to provide wardening and visitor engagement • A North Kent Coast dog project to promote responsible dog ownership and encourage walking on lead in sensitive areas • Codes of conduct developed in partnership with local groups and clubs to raise awareness of recreational disturbance in a variety of activities both on and off of the water • Interpretation and signage • New and/or enhanced infrastructure • Enforcement and Monitoring

The report4 also considered alternative measures, such as legal covenants relating to pet ownership in new developments, and capping visitor numbers at recreational sites. Due to the complexities in enforcing legal covenants and in reducing visitor numbers to the North Kent marshes, it is difficult to have confidence that such measures would be effective in the long term.

The suite of strategic mitigation measures are being delivered through the Bird Wise6 project, a partnership of local authorities and conservation organisations in North Kent, to ensure that development, considered in-combination, does not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European sites. A per-dwelling tariff7 has been calculated using the total cost of delivering the mitigation measures in-perpetuity and the planned number of additional dwellings expected to be built in North Kent. Swale’s tariff is £250.39 per dwelling.

Given the proximity of the site to the SPA and the established operation of the SAMMS, I

5 Liley, D. & Underhill-Day, J. (2013). Thames, Medway and Swale Estuaries – Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy. Unpublished report by Footprint Ecology 6 Full details available at www.birdwise.org.uk 7 Baseline tariff set at £223.58 per new dwelling in 2014, index linked and subject to annual increase.

Page 107 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.1

APPENDIX 2 consider that a payment in accordance with this strategy is still necessary, and this is agreed by the applicant.

Natural England has worked with the north Kent Local Planning Authorities to support them in preparing the SAMMS and the underpinning evidence base. Natural England agree that the mitigation measures to ensure additional impacts from recreational disturbance to the SPAs and Ramsar Sites are ecologically sound. As such, the Applicant does not need to provide their own evidence base on these aspects. Evidence should however be submitted showing that a mitigation contribution payment has either: • Been made to the Bird Wise scheme through a Unilateral Undertaking; or • Be made through a s106 agreement where Heads of Terms have been agreed and the agreement will be signed prior to any permission being granted.

Consideration has also been given to the possibility that there could be other impacts on the integrity of the relevant SPAs, notably in respect of surface water running off from the site and reaching the SPAs, but the Council conclude that the proposed SUDS drainage system will be sufficient to ensure that this does not occur.

Part 4 – Summary of the Appropriate Assessment - To be carried out by the Competent Authority (the local planning authority) in liaison with Natural England Having considered the proposed mitigation and avoidance measures to be provided in-perpetuity through the secured contribution to the Bird Wise scheme, Swale Council conclude that with mitigation, the plan or project will have no adverse effect on the integrity of the European protected site(s).

The applicant has agreed to make the required financial payments under SAMMS through a S106 agreement. This will be required prior to occupation of the development.

The proposed mitigation in respect of potential surface water runoff is also noted and accepted.

Having made this appropriate assessment of the implications of the plan or project for the site(s) in view of that site’s conservation objectives, and having consulted Natural England and fully considered any representation received (see below), the authority may now agree to the plan or project under regulation 63 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.

Natural England Officer:

Summary of Natural England’s comments:

i This template is to be used to aid the decision making for residential developments where the only potential impact is from recreational pressure that the Bird Wise scheme can mitigate. There may be cases close to the designated sites where additional impacts such as loss of habitat supporting SPA bird species or additional recreation management measures are needed, for example, which will require a bespoke, more detailed appropriate assessment.

Page 108 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

2.2 REFERENCE NO - 20/502407/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL: The construction of thirteen commercial units (for general industrial, storage and distribution, and light industrial use), and associated parking and landscaping. ADDRESS Land South East Of A299 Slip Road Off Thanet Way Highstreet Road Hernhill Kent ME13 9EN RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions as set out below and any further consultation responses (closing date 25th February 2021.) SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION Application is broadly in line with National and Local Planning Policy and in particular Members will note that a similar application on land adjacent to this parcel for 34 industrial units was approved by this committee under planning reference 18/506384/FULL. Furthermore, the proposal would not prejudice highway safety or convenience. As such, based upon the recent decision noted above, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable. REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Objection from Parish Council WARD Boughton And PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT P&S Properties Courtenay Hernhill South East AGENT Turner Jackson Day Associates DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE 27/10/20 05/11/20

Planning History

18/506384/FULL

Change of use of land and development of 34 no. general industrial units, a secure lorry park, cafe and associated landscaping. (Resubmission of 18/504147/FULL) as amended by drawings received 13/03/2019; 04/04/2019; 05/04/2019; 12/04/2019; and 02/05/2019 Approved Decision Date: 09.10.2019

18/504147/FULL

Change of use of land and development of 43no. general industrial units, a secure lorry park, cafe and associated landscaping. Withdrawn Decision Date: 29.11.2018

15/505213/FULL

Part retrospective application for the importation of waste material and engineering operations to form landscape bunds, construction of a 3 metre high Gabion basket stone wall, change of use of land and construction of van and HGV lorry park, access and construction of a roadside transport cafe for A3/A5 uses plus 24 hour WC and driver wash. Approved Decision Date: 30.11.2016

Page 109 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.01 The site is located on a vacant parcel of land on the south-east side of the A299 Thanet Way at the Dargate interchange, north east of Plumpudding Lane, and to the north-west of the slip road to the A299, which as Members may be aware is part of the local road network maintained by KCC Highways and Transportation. The application site extends to 0.42 hectares, and would adjoin a larger site which has an area of 0.78 hectares, making a total site area of 1.2 hectares. The site is, at present, cleared. It is partly bounded by trees and vegetation to the northwest side adjacent to the Thanet Way. The northeast part of the site is visible from the highway, and there are existing bunds on these sides of the site, as well as to the southeast.

1.02 Directly to the southeast of the site is an existing business park and freight terminal. A short distance to the north of the site on the coast bound carriageway there is an established petrol filling station, a shop, a Travelodge and a café. On the London-bound carriageway there is another filling station and a coffee shop.

1.03 The site slopes gently downward from the south western end to the north eastern end, in two distinct but separate gradations. A drawing is included within the application showing these changes of levels.

1.04 To the northeast of the site, on Highstreet Road and Dargate Road, there are a number of residential properties.

1.05 An application for a change of use of the land and construction of a van and HGV lorry park, access and construction of a roadside transport cafe for A3/A5 uses plus a 24 hour WC and driver washing facilities were approved in November 2016 under planning reference 15/505213/FULL. This proposal has not been implemented.

1.06 In 2018, a similar application for forty one industrial units and a truckstop was withdrawn when the agent became aware of the fact that part of the boundaries to the site shown on the site layout for that application were not within the ownership of the applicants (18/504147/FULL).

1.07 In 2019, a revised application for 34 general industrial units, a secure lorry park, cafe and associated landscaping was approved under planning reference 18/506384/FULL. A Unilateral Undertaking from the developer agreed to explore with KCC Highways and Transportation methods of reducing the impact of HGVs on the local road network. That Undertaking still applies and in particular Members will note that it requires the developer to not only explore those measures, but to inform the Council of what measures are agreed by KCC and to then implement those measures, prior to any use or occupation of the development.

1.08 The lorry park was designed for the parking of fourteen HGVs and nine smaller vehicles, with the truckstop having a floor area of 16 metres by 12 metres, offering café facilities and washrooms for visiting drivers.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.01 The proposal relates to a section of the wider site where the truckstop/café and secure lorry park were approved under reference 18/506384/FULL, and instead proposes constructing a further thirteen industrial units on this land. The buildings would have a combined floor space of 1,170 square metres.

Page 110 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

2.02 The industrial units would be faced with grey panels panels to provide a visual variation in the appearance of the units, as approved on the thirty-four units already approved They would have the appearance of two-storey buildings, but with no first floor, making each unit single floor only, and have shallow, steel profile pitched roofs. The units would each measure 8 metres by 12 metres floor area and extend to a ridge height of 8.5metres. Each unit would have two allocated parking spaces adjacent to the unit, and one delivery space outside the roller shutter door serving each unit. Original drawings showed fifteen units, but two have been removed at Officer’s request, as they would have occupied a very prominent position at the northern end of the site. The amended drawings show these units replaced by soft landscaping.

2.03 The proposal is accompanied by a landscaping scheme, which shows a scheme of soft landscaping to the boundaries of the site as well as landscaping within the site. The planting schedule accompanying the application shows a mix of the existing trees and shrubs on the boundaries of the site with new native species trees, to include Acer Campetre (field maple); Alnus Glutinosa (common alder); and Carpinus Betulus (common hornbeam). Other planting of shrubs will include Hedera (ivy), Ilex (holly) and Berberis. Importantly, landscaping is shown on the prominent corner of the site facing London-bound traffic on the Thanet Way.

2.04 Vehicular access to the site would be provided from the slip road leading to/from the Thanet Way, as previously approved.

2.05 The buildings would be restricted to the following Use Classes: B1, Light Industrial; B2, General Industrial; and B8, Storage and warehousing.

2.06 The proposal is also accompanied by a drainage plan; an ecological and reptile survey; a surface water management plan and flood risk assessment; a waste assessment criteria report; and a transport statement.

3.0 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Existing Proposed Change (+/-)

Site Area (ha) 0.42 ha 0.42 ha - Approximate Ridge Height (m) - 8.2m +8.2m Approximate Eaves Height (m) - 7.2m +7.2m Approximate Depth (m) - 12m (per unit) +12m (per unit) Approximate Width (m) - 8m (per unit) +8m (per unit) No. of Storeys - 1 Parking Spaces - 45 (Three + 45 spaces for each unit and six visitor spaces)

4.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

4.01 Outside established built-up area boundaries.

Page 111 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

5.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

5.01 Chapter 2 – Achieving sustainable development Chapter 6 – Building a strong, competitive economy Chapter 12 – Achieving well designed places

Bearing fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017

5.02 Policy ST1 – Delivering sustainable development Policy CP1 – Building a strong, competitive economy Policy CP 4 – Requiring good design Policy DM 7 – Vehicle parking Policy DM 14 – General development criteria Policy DM 19 – Sustainable design and construction Policy DM 21 – Water, flooding and drainage

6.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

6.01 Two objections have been received from local residents. Their contents may be summarised as follows:

• Increase in traffic • Dargate Road has no pavements – danger to pedestrians • ‘The road can at times be busy and therefore, it is essential before any planning is approved a survey of the road is carried out, this was promised when the original planning was approved, but I do not believe, to date, it has ever been carried out. This should then lead to some form of traffic calming.’ • The land would be better used for parking, rather than more industrial units • We operate a range of LGV vehicles which enter and leave our site the largest of these would find it difficult and dangerous to leave or gain access to our site if vehicles were parked opposite or close to the entrance to our site. I feel this could be dangerous to our vehicles and other vehicles using the A299 slip road.

In the light of minor changes to the description of the development and the submitted Design and Access Statement I have re-consulted local residents. The closing date is 25th February2021. I will update Members on further responses received.

7.0 CONSULTATIONS

7.01 Hernhill Parish Council raises objection to the proposal. Their comments are given in full below:

‘The Parish Council unanimously object to the application. Despite the reduction in the original number of units and additional landscaping the PC feel that the lorry park and accompanying facilities at the site should be retained as this is a much needed vital resource for the area. The proposal to replace the lorry park and facilities with more units is considered to be over intensification of the site, without proven need as the other part of the site has yet to be developed. There are concerns that there is not enough parking available at the site for this number of units and certainly no space allocated for visitor parking leading to concerns of over spill from the site into nearby country lanes.’

Page 112 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

7.02 KCC Highways and Transportation raises no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions included below.

7.03 The Environment Agency raises no objection.

7.04 The Environmental Protection Team Leader raises no objection.

7.05 Southern Water raises no objection, subject to the inclusion of an Informative listed below.

7.06 No response has been received from KCC Ecology. I have again requested the same, and will report any response to the Planning Committee at the meeting.

7.07 Kent Police has requested a number of Informatives to be included; those specific to this site are listed below.

7.08 Natural England raises no objection

7.09 KCC Flood and Water Management raises no objection, subject to the inclusion of drainage conditions listed below.

7.10 The Lower Medway Internal Drainage Board raises no objection.

7.11 As noted above, In the light of minor changes to the description of the development and the submitted Design and Access Statement I have re-consulted the Parish Council. The closing date is 25th February2021. I will update Members on further responses received

8.0 APPRAISAL

8.01 The key material planning issues to consider in this case are those of the principle of development, effect upon local highway safety and convenience; the effect upon residential amenity; visual amenity and the local landscape. For the sake of regularity, I shall consider each of these in turn.

8.02 Principle of Development – The site is situated some distance outside any established built-up area boundary, where policies of rural restraint apply. The Council generally would not support development outside the established boundaries, but I am of the opinion that the proposal should be treated as an exception for the following reasons:

• Members will note the planning history, particularly the previous permission for 34 units, which shows that the principle of development on this site is acceptable; • Historical use – The proposed site has seen various works to its levels in the past, all of which were regularised by the previous application for 34 units and a truckstop. • The site does not currently present a pleasing visual aspect; • The location has good road transport links, adjacent to the Thanet Way and approximately two miles from both the M2 and A2 ultimately connecting with the port of Dover in one direction and London in the other direction. As such, the site is in a sustainable location; and • The site is not situated in an isolated rural location; existing freight and industrial facilities are also to be found in the immediate vicinity together with other built development.

Page 113 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

As such, the site is in an appropriate location for this development, in accordance with the relevant policies of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2017. I therefore find the principle of development to be acceptable in this case.

8.03 Highway Safety and Convenience - I note the comments from local residents with regard to highways concerns, but these views are not supported by the views expressed by KCC Highways and Transportation. Much as I have every sympathy with the concerns of local residents, in this matter I must take the expert advice of the Highway Authority responsible for the A299 and the other roads in the vicinity of the site.

8.04 Residential Amenity - With regard to the effect of the proposal on residential amenity, I note that the nearest property to the site is situated approximately 120 metres away. Bearing in mind that the dual-carriageway Thanet Way is a similar distance away from these dwellings, I consider it unlikely that the proposal, if approved, would increase any instance of noise issues. The main residential amenity issues raised are traffic issues which would have a knock-on effect on residential amenity; this issue is considered in the previous paragraph.

8.05 Members will also note that the Environmental Protection Team Leader raises no objection. The conditions requested by them are included below.

8.06 It should also be noted that there are a number of nearby sites which have industrial units on them for heavy and light industry, storage and distribution, etc. This suggests that the immediate area is a suitable area to provide such commercial sites, supporting local businesses and encouraging enterprise, probably due to the excellent transport links provided.

8.07 With respect to visual amenity, it should be noted that Officers have held extensive negotiations with the applicants and their agent in order to achieve a well-designed scheme, with a good level of landscaping both softening and screening the development visually. It is difficult to produce visually pleasing industrial units, but the applicant has taken pains to amend the proposal to show modest units, with suitable cladding options. However, I do recommend the inclusion of Condition 3 below, to ensure that the prominent flank elevation of Unit 40 is changed to include a window, to break up the expanse of blank wall.

8.08 I would note that the loss of the truckstop and lorry parking from the approved scheme is unfortunate, and I would acknowledge that there is a need for more lorry parking in the county. However, I do not believe this to be a valid planning reason for refusing the present application, particularly when remembering that these facilities do not as yet exist. As such, in terms of lorry parking, the proposal preserves the status quo.

8.09 I would also contend that the additional thirteen units would provide the same opportunities for employment than would be the case for a café and lorry park.

8.10 As such, I am of the opinion that the proposal, if approved, will bring benefits in excess of any detrimental impact of the scheme, which I consider to be minor. The preamble to Policy CP1 of Bearing Fruits 2031 – The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017 notes at paragraph 5.1.14 that ‘priority locations’ for appropriate sites for employment include those which are ‘well related to either the A249, A2, Sittingbourne Northern Relief Road or A299 Thanet Way’. The applicant estimates, as noted above, that approximately 80 new jobs would be created by the proposal, which further supports the aims of Policy CP1 in supporting the local economy and creating new jobs for the area. Similarly, Policy DM3 (the rural economy) states that ‘planning permission will be granted for the

Page 114 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

sustainable growth and expansion of business and enterprise in the rural area.’ As such, I am of the opinion that the proposal is in full accord with both the NPPF and the adopted Local Plan.

8.11 Ecology – It is important that biodiversity net gain is an aspect of any permission granted. The detailed planting scheme submitted, with the inclusion of native species is an important aspect of this gain. However, to ensure that an ecological gain for the site is obtained, I have included a condition below.

9.0 CONCLUSION

9.01 As such, I recommend that the proposal be approved, subject to the conditions set out below, and subject to the further views of KCC Highways and Transportation.

10.0 RECOMMENDATION – GRANT Subject to conditions as set out below, and any further comments from consultees and third parties as described above (closing date 25th February 2021.:

CONDITIONS

(1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.

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

(2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings:

1564-001D; 1564-100A; 1564-101A; 1564-102A;1564-103A; 1564.200A; 1564-201A; 1564-202A; 1564-300A; T-2019-087-02 Rev 01; T-2019-087-020 Rev 02; T-2019-087-021 Rev 02; T-2019-087-03 Rev 01; T-2019-087-S278-03 Rev 01; T-2019-087-012 Rev 02; T-2019-087-013 Rev 02 ; T-2019-087-014 Rev 02; T-2019-087-022 Rev 03 and 5224-LLB-XX-XX-DR-L-0002 Rev P01.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt, and in the interests of proper planning.

(3) Notwithstanding Condition (2) above, no development beyond the construction of foundations shall take place before an amended drawing showing the north facing flank wall of Unit 40, with at least one window to the side, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

(4) No development beyond the construction of foundations shall take place until details in the form of samples of external finishing materials to be used in the construction of the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

Page 115 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

(5) No floodlighting, security lighting or other external lighting shall be installed or operated at the site, other than in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include:

- A statement of why lighting is required, the proposed frequency of the use and the hours of illumination. - A site plan showing the area to be lit relative to the surrounding area, indicating parking or access arrangements where appropriate, and highlighting any significant existing or proposed landscape or boundary features. - Details of the number, location and height of the lighting columns or other fixtures. - The type, number, mounting height and alignment of the luminaries. - The beam angles and upwards waste light ratio for each light. - An isolux diagram showing the predicted illuminance levels at critical locations on the boundary of the site and where the site abuts residential properties.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and the residential amenities of occupiers of nearby dwellings.

(6) No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: i the parking and turning of vehicles of site operatives and visitors ii loading and unloading of plant and materials iii storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development iv the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate v wheel washing facilities vi measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction vii a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area and highway safety and convenience

(7) No construction work in connection with the development shall take place on any Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor on any other day except between the following times:

Monday to Friday 0730 – 1900 hours, Saturdays 0730 – 1300 hours unless in association with an emergency or with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

(8) No impact pile driving in connection with the construction of the development shall take place on the site on any Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor any other day except between the following times:- Monday to Friday 0900-1700hours unless in association with an emergency or with the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

Page 116 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

(9) Development shall not begin in any phase 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 be based upon the Surface Water Management Strategy incorporating a Flood Risk Assessment (October 2018) by RMB Consultants. The drainage scheme shall also 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 at an agreed discharge rate 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 then 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.

(10) No building on any phase (or within an agreed implementation schedule) of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until a Verification Report pertaining to the surface water drainage system, carried out by a suitably qualified professional, has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority which demonstrates 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 sustainable 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, and to ensure that the development as constructed is compliant with and subsequently maintained pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 165 of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018).

(11) The scheme of tree planting and landscaping shown on the submitted Planting Plan numbered 5224-LLB-XX-XX-DR-L-0002 Rev P01 shall be carried out within 12 months of the completion of the development. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

Page 117 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

(12) The trees shown on the plans hereby approved as "existing trees to be retained" shall be retained and maintained. Any trees removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of the date of this permission shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(13) The units hereby permitted shall be used for the purpose of offices, research and development, light or general industrial uses; or storage and distribution, and for no other purpose, including any other purposes in Classes B1, B2 or B8 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area.

(14) Notwithstanding Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) no additional floor space in the form of a mezzanine floor shall be provided within units 1-34 of the development hereby approved.

Reason: In order to reduce the potential for the intensification of use of the site and in the interests of residential amenity and highway safety in accordance.

(15) The area shown on the submitted plan as loading, off-loading, turning and parking space shall be used for or be available for such use at all times when the premises are in use and no development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking or re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on that area of land or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved area; such land and access thereto shall be provided prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted.

Reason: Development without adequate provision for the parking, loading or off-loading of vehicles is likely to lead to parking inconvenient to other road users.

(16) No external storage of parts, equipment, raw materials or products shall take place within the site.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

(17) No development shall take place until details in the form of cross-sectional drawings through the site showing existing and proposed site levels and finished floor levels have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be completed strictly in accordance with those approved details.

Reason: In order to secure a record of existing site levels and to ensure a satisfactory form of development having regard to the sloping nature of the site,

(18) The buildings hereby approved shall be constructed to BREEAM ‘Good’ Standard or an equivalent standard and prior to the use of the buildings the relevant certification shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming that the required standard has been achieved.

Page 118 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

Reason: In the interests of promoting energy efficiency and sustainable development.

(19) No development beyond the construction of the foundations shall take place until a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan (setting out the level of Biodiversity Net Gain that would be delivered) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the use hereby approved commencing, and shall thereafter be maintained.

Reason: To ensure that there is a net gain in biodiversity.

(20) Prior to the use of the site commencing, the visibility splays shown on the submitted drawings, with no obstructions over 1.05 metres above carriageway level, shall be provided and thereafter maintained in perpetuity.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and amenity.

(21) No development shall take place before written evidence has been provided to the LPA that either the north east corner of the site does not impinge upon the public highway or that any area of public highway overlapping the proposal site has been stopped up..

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and amenity..

Informatives

(1) The following advice is provided by Kent Police:

1. Access controlled gates for “out of hours” security, these can be coded to allow those businesses access if required outside of main working hours. 2. Any lighting plan should be approved by a professional lighting engineer e.g. a Member of the ILP or the SLL to help avoid conflict and light pollution also to work with any CCTV. 3. To help address vehicle crime security for Motorbikes, Mopeds, Electric bikes and similar, e.g. ground or wall anchors should be installed. 4. If approved, site security is required for the construction phase. There is a duty for the principle contractor “to take reasonable steps to prevent access by unauthorised persons to the construction site” under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. The site security should incorporate plant, machinery, supplies, tools and other vehicles and be site specific to geography and site requirements.

If the points above are not addressed, they can affect the development and local policing.

(2) 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/infrastructurecharges

(3) It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure, before the development hereby approved is commenced, that all necessary highway approvals and consents where

Page 119 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

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-bo undary-enqiries

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.

Council’s Approach to this Application

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), February 2019 the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. We work with applicants/agents in a positive and creative way by offering a pre-application advice service, where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome and as appropriate, updating applicants/ agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

In this instance:

Amendments and additional information were submitted by the applicant; and the application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

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 120 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.2

Page 121 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

2.3 REFERENCE NO - 20/505412/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Section 73 - Application for variation of conditions 1 (model aircraft flying times) and 2 (maximum number of model aircraft flying at one time) pursuant to 16/504776/FULL for - Variation of condition 1 of SW/13/0579 - to make permission permanent. ADDRESS Land Adjacent to Heel Farm Heel Road Throwley Faversham Kent ME13 0JH RECOMMENDATION Grant subject to Conditions SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Proposal is in accordance with national and local planning policy REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Parish Council objection WARD East Downs PARISH COUNCIL Throwley APPLICANT Mr James & Charles Hills AGENT Mr Brian Planner DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE 17/02/21 24/12/20

Planning History 16/504776/FULL Variation of condition 1 of SW/13/0579 - to make permission permanent. Approved Decision Date: 22.08.2016

SW/13/0579 To vary conditions 1 and 2 of SW/08/0559 to make permission permanent and to vary hours of flight Grant of Conditional PP Decision Date: 27.09.2013

SW/08/0559 Non-compliance with condition (1) of planning permission SW/05/0294 to allow continuation of model aircraft flying beyond 31st May 2008 Grant of Conditional PP Decision Date: 10.10.2008

SW/05/0294 Model aircraft flying Grant of Conditional PP Decision Date: 24.05.2005

SW/03/0381 Lawful Development Certificate for use of land for model aircraft flying. Refused Decision Date:

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.1 The application refers to a field adjacent to Heel Farm, Throwley. The site is a large area of meadow (measuring approximately one hectare), bounded on all sides by lanes, trees and hedgerows. Both electric ‘silent flight’ (hereafter referred to as ‘SF’) planes and internal combustion (hereafter referred to as ‘IC’) engine planes are used.

Page 123 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

The present permitted hours of use are as follows:

Monday to Friday – 09.00 – 16.00 (IC); 09.00 -17.00 (SF) Saturday – 09.00 – 16.00 (IC); 09.00 – 19.00 (SF) Sundays & Bank Holidays – 09.00 – 16.00 (SF only)

Temporary permission was granted in 2005 (for three years), 2008 (for five years) and 2013 (for three years). Permission was made permanent under planning reference 16/504776/FULL. Members will note that the decision notice is appended and that conditions (1) and (2) of the permission read as follows:

1 No model aircraft flying shall take place on the site outside the following times;

Monday to Saturday 09.00-16.00 and at no time on any Sunday or Public Holiday; except for those craft capable of flying silently, in which case the flying times may be extended to 19.00 on Mondays to Saturdays, and between 09.00 and 16.00 on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area

2 No more than two aircraft shall be allowed to fly at any one time, with a maximum of one further aircraft engine running on the ground.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

1.2 There is an unmade grass track leading off the road across to the field to where club members meet, park, and fly their aeroplanes. The site consists of a large, open field, in a fairly remote location, with few dwellings nearby (although there are four within 100 metres of the site boundary). The site is within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It is located within Throwley Parish, with the parish boundary with Stalisfield nearby.

2.0 PROPOSAL

2.1 This application seeks a variation of conditions 1 and 2 of 16/504776/FULL to extend the hours of flying for electric powered model aircraft and gliders from 19.00 to 20.30 on Mondays to Saturdays and to increase the number of model aircraft flying at any one time from two to four with no more than one being internal combustion (IC) powered.

The applicants have included the following statement within their proposal:

‘The use of the site for model aircraft flying has continued successfully for over 30 years and the number of members has continued to grow. In the early days of flying at the site most model aircraft were IC powered. However, the nature of model aircraft flying has changed significantly over this period and since the original planning permission was granted with almost all model flying now being electric powered (currently in excess of 90% and increasing). Therefore, noise is now far less than when the original permission was granted and is not a material issue. To increase the number of model aircraft flying at any one time to four can be achieved safely and without increasing noise levels. The increase in hours would greatly help those members wishing to fly in the early evening, often when conditions are good for model aircraft flying, and would particularly assist those members wishing to

Page 124 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

take part in the sport after work. The North Downs Model Club remains affiliated with the British Model Flying Association (BMFA) and complies with their requirements for good club management, especially with regard to the training of those new to the sport and the safe flying of model aircraft generally. The club requires all members to also be members of the BMFA which includes Third Party Liability insurance cover of £25,000,000. In addition, new legislation has recently been introduced to further control the sport with all owners of model aircraft being required to register for a unique operator ID.’

2.2 The applicant advises that typically no more than two to six people attend the site on any given day and that maximum attendance is ten people.

3.0 PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

3.1 Outside any established built-up area boundary

Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

4.0 POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017 - Policies: - ST3 – Settlement Strategy - DM14– General Development Criteria - DM24 - Conserving and enhancing valued landscapes

5.0 LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

COMMENTS RECEIVED OFFICER RESPONSE Parish Councils - Throwley PC – Objection raised; Stalisfield PC - No objection Residential Objections - Five Residential Support - None

5.1 Five emails of objection have been received from local residents. Their contents may be summarised as follows:

- Sometimes the flying times and the amount of aeroplanes exceed those permitted already - Flying is most often done after work, when residents need to relax and enjoy the peace and quiet - Unsuitable in an AONB - Increased use will lead to increased traffic – narrow lanes surround the site - Not all flying club members are courteous and aware of the need to respect local residents - No fly zones are not clearly marked

5.2 The applicant has responded to these concerns, and has suggested that, to ensure that residential amenity is protected, Condition (3) should be amended to allow four aeroplanes in the air, with only one being IC powered, and the omission of the aeroplane engine running on the ground.

Page 125 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

6.0 CONSULTATION RESPONSES

6.1 Throwley Parish Council raises objection to the proposal. Their comments are given in full as follows: ‘The Council are concerned at the additional hours being applied for as these times impinge on residents leisure time. Additional flying aircraft will also bring more traffic to very narrow lanes. We refer to the previous application, 16/504776/ FULL, where permission was given with restrictions. The Council feel that this was a reasonable decision and gives ample opportunity to fly model aircraft. We oppose the new application.’

6.2 Stalisfield Parish Council raises no objection.

6.3 KCC Highways and Transportation advises that the scale of the proposal does not require their involvement.

6.4 The Environmental Health Manager raises no objection to the proposal, and does not comment on the potential wording of conditions.

7.0 APPRAISAL

7.1 When deciding upon one of the previous applications (SW/13/0579) the case officer visited the site with a colleague from the Environmental Health Team on a flying day, to assess noise issues. They were both of the opinion that noise from the aeroplanes would be fairly minimal. Since that visit, I understand that there has been a major switch to silent flight (SF) aeroplanes, which would suggest that noise issues would now have a lesser impact on residential amenity.

7.2 I also note there have been no complaints over the last four years, and further note that the club has had over fifteen years to prove the minimal effect on residential amenity; I would suggest that the case was proven, and that the present level of use is acceptable; what now remains is to decide on the changes in use proposed, and to assess their impact on residential amenity.

7.3 As noted, the field in question is quite large and very open, making it an ideal spot for the flyers. I note that there are very few local residences in the immediate vicinity of the field, which would suggest that the numbers of those who might be affected is equally fairly minimal.

7.4 I note the concerns raised by the Parish Council and local residents, but I am of the opinion that, bearing in mind that model flying appears to be a fairly niche hobby, and that the club has been operating from the site for many years with no adverse impact on highway safety, it is unlikely that the proposal, if approved, would result in an increase in traffic which would be injurious to highway safety and amenity.

7.5 It is pleasing to note that the applicant has taken local concerns seriously, and has responded to these concerns by suggesting that, to ensure that residential amenity is protected, Condition (2) should be amended to allow four aeroplanes in the air, with only one being IC powered, and the omission of the aeroplane engine running on the ground. This will actually result in only one plane at any one time being IC powered, thus further reducing potential noise nuisance (under the present permission, three could be IC powered).

7.6 Finally, it appears that since flying started on this field, the increase in the use of SF electric planes has risen enormously, with the applicant stating that approximately 90% of the flights from this field are SF. As such, I consider that the proposal would have a

Page 126 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

minimal impact on residential amenity, and I recommend that the proposal be approved, subject to the following conditions noted below. Conditions (3) to (7) below are as imposed under the extant permission 16/504776/FULL.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION – Grant subject to the following conditions:

CONDITIONS

1 No model aircraft flying shall take place on the site outside the following times;

Monday to Saturday 09.00-16.00 and at no time on any Sunday or Public Holiday; except for those craft capable of flying silently (electric), in which case the flying times may be extended to 20:30 on Mondays to Saturdays, and between 09.00 and 16.00 on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area

2. No more than four aircraft shall be allowed to fly at any one time, with at least three of those craft capable of flying silently (electric).

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

3. The launching of internal combustion engine powered fixed wing aircraft shall only be from the larger north-eastern of the two take-off areas shown on the original application plan coloured in green and edged red, and the other smaller take-off area shall only be used for the launching of silent flight or helicopter models. No aircraft shall be allowed to fly beyond the boundaries of the field (as edged green on the original application plan) and within the field, no aircraft shall be allowed to fly within 200 metres of any dwelling, or within 50 metres of the public footpath to the south of the flying field. These 200m and 50m exclusion zones must be clearly physically marked out on site at all times that model aircraft are flying, by means that are readily visible from the launch areas, and details of which are first to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

4. Only model aircraft fitted with an effective silencer (muffler) can be flown at the site and must be silenced to a level that is below 82 dB(A) at a distance of 7 metres.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area

5. No aircraft flown at the site shall exceed a weight of 7 Kg and no internal combustion engine powered craft shall have other than two stroke internal combustion engines.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

Page 127 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

6. The use permitted shall be for the sole use of members of the North Downs Model Flying Club.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of Class B of Part 4 of Schedule 2 to The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) 1995, as amended, there shall not be any competition flying, organised displays or joint club events related to model aircraft flying held on the flying field, as defined by the green line on the approved application plan, at any time.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area, with special reference to the amenities of residents of the area.

The Council’s approach to the application

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), February 2019 the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. We work with applicants/agents in a positive and creative way by offering a pre-application advice service, where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome and as appropriate, updating applicants / agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

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 128 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

Page 129 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

APPENDIX 1

Page 131 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

APPENDIX 1

Page 132 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 2.3

APPENDIX 1

Page 133 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.1

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 4 MARCH 2021 PART 3

Report of the Head of Planning

PART 3

Applications for which REFUSAL is recommended

3.1 REFERENCE NO - 21/500012/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Erection of single storey front extension with internal alterations. ADDRESS 59 Wards Hill Road Minster-on-sea Sheerness Kent ME12 2LL RECOMMENDATION Refusal SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL The proposal amounts to poor design, harmful to the character and appearance of the dwelling and the wider streetscene REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Parish Council support WARD Minster Cliffs PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL APPLICANT Mr & Mrs Belsey Minster-On-Sea AGENT EvolutionBlue DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE 05/03/21 03/02/21

Planning History

SW/85/0332 Two storey side extension Approved Decision Date: 04.06.1985

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.1 59 Wards Hill Road is a detached property situated in the built up area of Minster.

1.2 There is a seemingly original attached flat roofed side garage offset from the property line, this projects forward of the front elevation by approx. 3.0m. The roofline of the garage extends across the front door of the property to create a canopy. There is an existing two storey pitched roof extension that sits behind the garage.

1.3 There is amenity space to the rear of the property as well as the front where it has been completely hard landscaped to provide off road parking.

1.4 The streetscene comprises of varying sized properties of differing design along this section of Wards Hill Road, some detached, some semi-detached.

2. PROPOSAL

Page 135 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.1

2.1 This application seeks approval for a 2.0m deep single storey front extension to the full width of the property, with a bay window.

2.2 The front door would be in the same location, albeit brought forward and there would also be an additional door servicing a storage area.

2.3 The roofline of this addition would be slightly above that of the existing garage but would also be of flat roof design.

2.4 Facing materials have been noted in the application form to match that of the host property, the roof finish would be black EPDM rubber.

3. PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

3.1 None.

4. POLICY AND CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017 policies:

o CP4 – Requiring good design

o DM14 - General development criteria

o DM16 - Alterations and extensions.

4.2 The Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Designing an Extension: A Guide for Householders states:

3.4 On houses with pitched roofs it is always best to have a matching pitched roof on the extension with the same type of tiles. All such two-storey extensions should have a pitched roof and front and other prominent single storey extensions are normally better for having pitched roofs.

5. LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 None received.

6. CONSULTATIONS

6.1 Minster-on-Sea Parish Council is in support of this application, stating:

Extension of internal living space with only minor effect on external elevations, and no detriment to visual or other amenity. Retains adequate parking space, with new frontage closely aligned with neighbouring dwellings.

7. BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

7.1 Application papers for application 21/500012/FULL

8. APPRAISAL

8.1 This site is situated within the defined built up area boundary of Minster and as such the principle of the development is acceptable subject to the other relevant policy considerations

Page 136 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.1

outlined below. The main points to consider when assessing this application are design, scale and visual amenity.

8.2 The extension projects further to the front than would normally be considered acceptable. However, given the existing garage projecting from the front of the house, its relationship with surrounding dwellings, and the lack of a strong building line in the streetscene, I take the view that this depth of front projection is not unacceptable in this instance.

8.3 However, as a prominent front extension, the proposal would be visible in the streetscene. It would feature a flat roof, and although the garage at the property has a flat roof, this proposal would exacerbate the limited harm that the garage causes, and would conflict markedly with the traditional design of the house. Put simply, it amounts to poor design which would harm the character and appearance of the dwelling itself and the wider streetscene. It would be contrary to the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled “Designing an Extension – A Guide for Householders” and to the Local Plan Policies set out above, all of which encourage good design. This amounts to a reason for refusal of planning permission.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 I am firmly of the view that the development proposed is unacceptable and recommend planning permission is refused for the reason set out below.

10. RECOMMENDATION – Refusal

REASON

(1) The single storey flat roof front extension proposed would, by virtue of its scale and poor design represent an incongruous feature in the streetscene which would be harmful to the character and appearance of both the dwelling itself and the wider area, contrary to policies CP4, DM14 and DM16 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2017, and to the advice in paragraph 3.4 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: Designing an extension – A guide for householders.

The Council’s approach to the application

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), February 2019 the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. We work with applicants/agents in a positive and creative way by offering a pre- application advice service, where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome and as appropriate, updating applicants / agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

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 137 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.1

Page 138 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

3.2 REFERENCE NO - 20/505466/FULL APPLICATION PROPOSAL Conversion of first floor and loft into 3no. one bedroom apartments, together with erection of three storey external staircase enclosure, three dormer windows, section of flat roof to south west elevation, changes to fenestration, creation of roof terraces and creation of external access and amenity area. Internal alterations to existing Pub and Restaurant. ADDRESS Napier Hotel 1 Alma Road Sheerness Kent ME12 2NZ RECOMMENDATION Refuse SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL The application proposes additional residential units within Flood Zone 3, and without evidence to the contrary, could give rise to significant and unacceptable risk to human life in the event of flooding. The design of the development, namely the dormer windows and external staircase would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area. REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE Town Council support WARD Sheerness TOWN COUNCIL Sheerness APPLICANT Mr Paul Newton Town Council AGENT Richard Baker Partnership DECISION DUE DATE PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE 21/01/21 28/01/21

Planning History

20/504578/SUB Submission of Details to Discharge Condition 2 (Materials) Condition 3 (Hard and Soft Landscaping) Condition 4 (Energy Efficiency) Condition 7 (Construction Method Statement) Condition 8 (Method of Disposal of Foul and Surface Waters) and Condition 9 (Obscure Glazing) Subject to 18/501872/FULL Approved Decision Date: 04.01.2021

18/501872/FULL Construction of 2 no. two bedroom dwellings with associated parking and ancillary facilities. Approved Decision Date: 18.06.2018

17/504958/FULL Removal of hard standing and construction of 2no. two bedroom houses with widening of dropped kerb and associated parking Withdrawn Decision Date: 07.03.2018

SW/90/0432 New toilets Grant of Conditional PP Decision Date: 03.05.1990

SW/87/1039 Corporate lamp Approved pre 1990 Decision Date: 08.10.1987

Page 139 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

1.1 The application site is comprised of a large detached two storey building located on a corner plot between Alma Road and Marine Parade. It is currently used as a pub/restaurant on the ground floor, with a three bedroom flat situated on the first floor.

1.2 The site lies within the defined built-up area boundary of Sheerness and within Flood Zone 3, as defined by the Environment Agency Flood Map as having a high probability of flooding. The surrounding area is characterised by terraced properties, and immediately south of the site is an empty plot of land, currently being redeveloped into a pair of semi-detached dwellings.

2. PROPOSAL

2.1 This application seeks planning permission for the conversion of first floor and loft into three one-bedroom flats. The ground floor will remain in pub/restaurant use, with some minor internal alterations to the position of the kitchen proposed.

2.2 Access to the flats will be provided by a proposed three storey external staircase enclosure, which will be located on the rear elevation of the building. A section of flat roof is proposed on the rear elevation on the third storey in order to create an internal hallway to the flat proposed in the loft. Three flat roof dormer windows (two on the north east roof slope and one on the north west roof slope) are proposed on the roof. The existing single storey extension at the rear of the building will be used to create two first floor roof terraces. A small area of outdoor amenity space is proposed at the rear of the building.

3. PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

3.1 Environment Agency Flood Zone 3

4. POLICY AND CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

4.2 Development Plan: Policies ST3, ST6, CP4, DM7, DM14, DM16, DM21 and DM28 of Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017

4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG): ‘The Conversion of Buildings into Flats & Houses in Multiple Occupation’

5. LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 None

6. CONSULTATIONS

6.1 KCC Highways – The development does not meet the criteria to warrant involvement from the Highways Authority.

6.2 Environment Agency – Object due to the location of the site in FZ3 and the lack of a Flood Risk Assessment.

6.3 Environmental Health – No adverse comments to make.

Page 140 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

6.4 Sheerness Town Council support the scheme, stating the following:

“Agree with the changes but suggest the following

1) In view of there being no car park, provisions be made for safe cycle storage and electric power point for electric bikes. 2) In view of the location near to local schools and the hospital, at least one flat be made available for teachers or NHS workers.”

7. BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

7.1 Plans and documents for application 20/505466/FULL.

8. APPRAISAL

Principle of Development

8.1 The principle of the development is acceptable in my view, as the proposal retains the ground floor of the building for commercial use, and proposes an intensified residential use on the first and second floors, which is appropriate in this location, within the built up area boundary of Sheerness.

Visual Impact

8.2 The development involves various changes to the exterior of the building, which will be visible in the streetscene. The proposal in its entirety would harm the character and appearance of the building in my view, by adding additional built clutter and volume. The proposal, particularly with regards the dormer windows proposed, would not just harm the appearance of the building itself but would compromise the character of the wider street scene where there are no dormer windows present in the immediate or local setting.

8.3 Although the external stair tower and additional section of flat roof may not be highly visible from the streetscene due to their location at the rear, they would be unacceptable, poorly designed additions to the building in my view, which would also harm the character and appearance of the property. The use of flat roof at this height is unacceptable, and the tall eaves height and shallow pitched roof on the stair tower represents poor design in my view. This significant harm to visual amenities would amount to a reason for refusal.

Residential Amenity

8.4 Firstly considering the amenity impacts for future occupiers of the development, I note the floorspace in the three flats comply with both the Council’s SPG and the National Space Standards. All habitable rooms are served by adequately positioned windows. A small area of outdoor amenity space is proposed at the rear of the building, as well as two roof terraces. Whilst these areas are limited in scale, I consider they are acceptable given the fact the flats only have one bedroom and are unlikely to be occupied by families. Furthermore the site is located close to the centre of Sheerness and the esplanade and given this central location, the lack of meaningful outdoor amenity space is not a significant issue here.

8.5 Regarding the impact on neighbouring properties, I do not envisage the additional built form at the site will cause any significantly harmful impacts to neighbouring dwellings.

Page 141 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

The staircase and flat roof extension at the rear is set a sufficient distance from the new dwellings to the south of the site, and doesn’t project rearwards of 1 Napier Terrace to the east. The proposed dormer widows are limited in scale and will not cause any unacceptable impacts to amenity in my view, providing views similar to the existing windows in the building.

8.6 I do have concerns regarding potential overlooking from the use of the existing flat roof at the rear as roof terraces. I believe overlooking of 1 Napier Terrace will be limited due to the two storey wing extension at this neighbouring property which will limit views from the terrace. However the roof terraces could overlook the gardens of the two new properties to the south of the site, causing detrimental harm to future occupiers of this development. If I was minded to approve the scheme, I would have included a condition ensuring privacy screens are erected along the south western side of the terraces to mitigate this impact.

Highways

8.7 Due to the sites location within the town centre and close to local shops, services and public transport links I consider this to be a sustainable location for residential development. As such, although the proposal provides no parking, I consider this is acceptable. I note the Town Council suggest that cycle storage should be provided on site. I agree, and if I was minded to approve the application, I would ensure this matter was addressed via an appropriately worded condition.

Flood Risk

8.8 The Environment Agency has objected to the proposal due to the lack of a Flood Risk Assessment. The site lies within Flood Zone 3 and proposes additional residential units on the first and second floors. In the absence of a Flood Risk Assessment, it is not possible to determine whether the development would cause a flood risk to future occupiers of the unit. Therefore this amounts to another reason for refusal.

SPA Payments

8.9 I have for completeness set out an Appropriate Assessment below. Since this application will result in a net increase in residential accommodation on the site, impacts to the SPA and Ramsar sites may occur from increased recreational disturbance. Due to the scale of the development there is no scope to provide on site mitigation and therefore off site mitigation is required by means of developer contributions at the rate of £250.39 per dwelling. As I am recommending refusal of this application, no payment has been sought from the applicant but it will be necessary to secure this payment should an appeal against the Council’s decision be lodged and subsequently upheld.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 The development is wholly unacceptable in my view, causing significant harm to the character and appearance of the building and wider area. Additionally, the potential flood risk impact has not been addressed. As such, I recommend planning permission is refused.

10. RECOMMENDATION - Refuse for the following reasons:

(1) The proposed external changes to the building, namely the external stair tower, additional flat roof at the third storey and dormer windows would constitute poor design, amounting to unacceptable features on the building in a manner harmful to

Page 142 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

its character and appearance, and the appearance of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies CP4, DM14 and DM16 of ‘Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017’.

(2) The proposal would introduce additional residential accommodation at the site which lies in Flood Zone 3 and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, could give rise to significant and unacceptable risk to human life in the event of flooding. The proposal would therefore be contrary to policies DM14 and DM21 of ‘Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017’ and to the advice of paragraphs 155 and 156 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

(3) The proposed development will create potential for recreational disturbance to the Swale Special Protection Area. The application submission does not include an appropriate financial contribution to the Thames, Medway and Swale Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy (SAMMS), or the means of securing such a contribution, and therefore fails to provide adequate mitigation against that potential harm. The development would therefore affect the integrity of this designated European site, and would be contrary to the aims of policies ST1, DM14, and DM28 of ‘Bearing Fruits 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan 2017’ and paragraphs 8, 170, 171, and 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The Council’s approach to the application

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), February 2019 the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. We work with applicants/agents in a positive and creative way by offering a pre-application advice service, where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome and as appropriate, updating applicants / agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the Committee and promote the application.

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.

Appropriate Assessment under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.

This Appropriate Assessment (AA) has been undertaken without information provided by the applicant.

The application site is located within 6km of The Medway Estuary and Marshes Special Protection Area (SPA) which is a European designated sites afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 as amended (the Habitat Regulations).

SPAs are protected sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC Birds Directive. They are classified for rare and vulnerable birds and for regularly occurring migratory species. Article 4(4) of the Birds Directive (2009/147/EC) requires Member States to take appropriate steps to avoid pollution or deterioration of habitats or any disturbances affecting the birds, in so far as these would be significant having regard to the objectives of this Article.

Page 143 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

The proposal therefore has potential to affect said site’s features of interest, and an Appropriate Assessment is required to establish the likely impacts of the development.

In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises the Council that it should have regard to any potential impacts that the proposal may have. Regulations 63 and 64 of the Habitat Regulations require a Habitat Regulations Assessment. For similar proposals NE also advise that the proposal is not necessary for the management of the European sites and that subject to a financial contribution to strategic mitigation and site remediation satisfactory to the EA, the proposal is unlikely to have significant effects on these sites.

The recent (April 2018) judgement (People Over Wind v Coillte Teoranta, ref. C-323/17) handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that, when determining the impacts of a development on protected area, “it is not appropriate, at the screening stage, to take account of the measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of the plan or project on that site.” The development therefore cannot be screened out of the need to provide an Appropriate Assessment solely on the basis of the mitigation measures agreed between Natural England and the North Kent Environmental Planning Group.

However, the proposed development is of a very small scale and, in itself and in combination with other development, would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA, subject to the conditions set out within the report.

Notwithstanding the above, NE has stipulated that, when considering any residential development within 6km of the SPA, the Council should secure financial contributions to the Thames, Medway and Swale Estuaries Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) Strategy in accordance with the recommendations of the North Kent Environmental Planning Group (NKEPG), and that such strategic mitigation must be in place before the dwelling is occupied.

Due to the scale of development there is no scope to provide on site mitigation such as an on-site dog walking area or signage to prevent the primary causes of bird disturbance, which are recreational disturbance including walking, dog walking (particularly off the lead), and predation of birds by cats.

Based on the correspondence with Natural England (via the NKEPG), I conclude that off site mitigation is required.

In this regard, whilst there are likely to be impacts upon the SPA arising from this development, the mitigation measures to be implemented within the SPA from collection of the standard SAMMS tariff (which has not been secured prior to the determination of this application) will ensure that these impacts will not be significant or long-term. I therefore consider that, subject to mitigation, there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA.

It can be noted that the required mitigation works will be carried out by Bird Wise, the brand name of the North Kent Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Scheme (SAMMS) Board, which itself is a partnership of local authorities, developers and environmental organisations, including SBC, KCC, Medway Council, Canterbury Council, the RSPB, Kent Wildlife Trust, and others (https://birdwise.org.uk/).

Page 144 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 ITEM 3.2

Page 145 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 PART 5

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 4 MARCH 2021 PART 5

Report of the Head of Planning

PART 5

Decisions by County Council and Secretary of State, reported for information

• Item 5.1 – 19 The Willows Newington

APPEAL DISMISSED

DELEGATED REFUSAL

Observations

Full support for the refusal of permission for this poorly designed development.

• Item 5.2 – Broadoak Farm Broadoak Road Milstead

APPEAL DISMISSED

DELEGATED REFUSAL

Observations

A very welcome decision.

• Item 5.3 – Land to rear of 132 High Street Newington

APPEAL DISMISSED / COSTS DECISIONS

DELEGATED REFUSAL

Observations

Full support for the refusal of this house in the countryside. The award of costs is most disappointing, arising as it does from an administrative error. As soon as the Council was made aware of the error it was dealt with, and the award of costs here appears to me to be, in part, punitive rather than related to the merits of the claim for costs, which is not what the costs regime is designed for.

• Item 5.4 – Black Cottages Mutton Lane Ospringe

APPEAL ALLOWED / COSTS AWARED TO APPELLANT

DELEGATED REFUSAL

Observations

This decision runs contrary to the Council’s very long-standing opposition to new

Page 147 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 PART 5

residential development on this site, and contrary to the adopted Local Plan. It is inconsistent with the approach of Inspectors on other small sites outside the Local Plan defined built up area boundaries. The earlier appeal decision appeared to be flawed and the Council made a very clear case as to why that was so. However, the latest Inspector logic is to argue in support of his colleague’s previous decision, justifying housing in the countryside on the basis that it might support facilities in a nearby urban area.

The Council did not repeat both earlier reasons for refusal, recognising the first Inspector’s clarity on design matters, but we did feel that the first Inspector’s approach to settlement policy analysis was misguided and needed to be challenged.

The circumstances here are not likely to be repeated elsewhere, but I still find the decision, and the award of costs, to be thinly justified.

• Item 5.5 – South East Side of Highview Road adj Minster Methodist Church

APPEAL DISMISSED

DELEGATED REFUSAL

Observations

Whilst the Inspector did not consider this very large mast to be harmful to visual amenity, they did concur that the siting of the equipment would harm highway safety and dismissed the appeal accordingly.

Page 148 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.1

Page 149 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.1

Page 150 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.2

Page 151 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.2

Page 152 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.2

Page 153 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 155 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 156 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 157 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 158 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 159 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 160 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.3

Page 161 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 163 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 164 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 165 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 166 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 167 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 168 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 169 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 170 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 171 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 172 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.4

Page 173 This page is intentionally left blank Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.5

Page 175 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.5

Page 176 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.5

Page 177 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.5

Page 178 Report to Planning Committee – 4 March 2021 Item 5.5

Page 179 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6 By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 181 This page is intentionally left blank By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 183 This page is intentionally left blank By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 187 This page is intentionally left blank By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 191 This page is intentionally left blank