Gravesham Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) Consultation Statement February 2017

Gravesham Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)

Consultation Statement

February 2017 Gravesham Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) – Consultation Statement February 2017

Introduction

This statement is the ‘Consultation Statement’ for the Gravesham Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan SPD as required by the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning ) (England) Regulations 2012. This statement sets out how the public and other stakeholders were consulted upon the SPD. The consultation statement issued alongside the draft SPD for consultation in March 2016 has now been updated to reflect the 2016 consultation and to accompany the adopted SPD.

Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)

The SCI was adopted in 2017and reflects the 2012 Regulations. It specifies measures that the Council will undertake in consulting upon draft SPDs and these have been reflected in the consultation process for the Gravesham Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan SPD. As per the SCI, the Council has involved key stakeholders in the preparation of this draft SPD for consultation (as set out in the SPD).

Consultation

Public consultation on the draft Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan was held for six weeks between 21st September–30th October 2015. During this consultation period, a public meeting with exhibition was held on 29th September 2015 with the exhibition being on display in the Civic Centre throughout the consultation period.

Information on the public consultation and public meeting was available via the following:

 On the council’s web site together with all draft documents  Civic Centre - Exhibition of consultation information in Civic Centre foyer along with copies of draft documents and paper copies of questionnaires throughout consultation period  ‘Your Borough’, article on public consultation and public meeting contained in the council’s newsletter , available online and hard copy delivered to every household in the borough during consultation period  iNovem, the council’s consultation portal - Email sent to 1400 individuals and organisations and statutory bodies registered on iNovem inviting them to participate in the consultation and informing them of the exhibition via the link to the council’s website  Parish Councils - link and relevant consultation documents on websites of Cobham, Higham, Luddesdown, Meopham, Shorne and Vigo Parish Councils  Exhibition and meeting – Old Town Hall, Gravesend 29th September 6pm – 9pm public meeting with presentation followed by discussion  Gravesham Borough Council e-Newsletter – with information on consultation sent to 620 residents.  Libraries – information on consultation, copies of documents and paper copies of questionnaires available in Gravesend Central, Higham, Meopham, Riverview Park and Vigo libraries.  Councillors - email sent to all Gravesham Borough Councillors  Facebook – invitation to participate in consultation sent out ahead of consultation start date of 21 September  Twitter – regular tweets sent out during consultation period

Thirty six consultees submitted 122 comments to this consultation. The draft SPD documents were modified as a result of comments received. A full schedule of comments received to this consultation and the council’s response is set out in Table 1.

A Consultation Statement was prepared in accordance with Regulation 12(a) and, together with the modified SPD was made available for representations between 21 March-17 April 2016 in accordance with Regulation 35.

The documents were made available:-

 At the Civic Centre and on the council’s web site  Parish Councils - link and relevant consultation documents on websites of Cobham, Higham, Luddesdown, Meopham, Shorne and Vigo Parish Councils  Libraries – information on consultation and copies of documents available in Gravesend Central, Higham, Meopham, Riverview Park and Vigo libraries

Information about the documents’ availability was given via

 Your Borough, the council’s newsletter with article on consultation, online and hard copy delivered to every household in the borough during consultation period  iNovem, the council’s consultation portal - email sent to 1400 individuals and organisations and statutory bodies registered on iNovem  Councillors - email sent to all Gravesham Borough Council councillors .

Thirteen consultees submitted 30 representations on the draft SPD, suggesting only relatively minor amendments and additional information to be referenced. Many of the requested changes have been taken forward in the adopted SPD.

A full schedule of representations made and the council’s response is set out in Table 2

The SPD overall has been updated to reflect that it is no longer draft and that the consultation has been undertaken. Gravesham Borough Council Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan Public consultation 21 September - 30 October 2015 Schedule of comments received with the council's response No. Name Conservation Comment Response Area 1 NWKCP (Mark Pritchard) All These are good documents having taken into account the topographic, historic and landscape character features of each area and moreover made reference to the Kent Downs AONB design statement which give excellent example of what 'good' design looks like in this area. Noted - No Further Action (NFA)

2 Horace Sutherland All All agricultural land must be preserved for growing food. not concrete. with out land we cannot proved home grown food and must import at a higher cost Noted - NFA

3 Horace Sutherland All As stated the protection of food growing land Noted - NFA 4 Horace Sutherland All Only the protection of food growing land Noted - NFA 5 Horace Sutherland All Any empty land within towns must be considered first Noted - NFA 6 Peter Wilson All It would be hypocritical of me to object to any of the appraisals and proposals as I live in an area that when I was a kid during the war was all open fields as far as the A2. The country needs houses now as it did then and sympathetic development is essential if the needs of the population are to be Noted - NFA met.

7 Shorne Parish Council All Welcomes the Conservation Area Appraisal and suggests a summary of the effect of conservation area status in protecting buildings and trees with a reminder of the need to obtain listed building Noted - reference to be made to information available in final consent. A general explanation of the effect of Article 4 Directions may also be useful DTP version

8 Shorne Parish Council All Very much welcomes the preparation of a schedule of Locally Listed Buildings ona parish by parish basis not necessarily restricted to just those in conservation areas. Noted - NFA

9 Shorne Parish Council All Page 5 Policy out of date. Noted - text to be revised 9 Gravesham Borough All Page 5 Policy out of date. Noted - text to be revised Council 10 Kent County Council All Please notify Historic Environment Record of all conservation area amendments Noted - on completion of the review all rural conservation area Heritage Conservation maps to be forwarded to the KCC HER team.

Page 1 of 14 11 Kent County Council All I would also suggest that in conformity with the guidance issues by Historic England Heritage Conservation (“Understanding Place: Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management”) section 2.1.5, a map of the Historic Environment Record (HER) entries and Areas of Archaeological Potential should be included in the CA appraisal document. Kent County Council can provide the Noted - reference to www.kent.gov.uk/HER to be referenced as HER information on request though it should be noted that this would only be a snapshot as HER a minimum in the final DTP version information is added continually. At the very least the document should identify the HER as a resource for historic environment information and contain a pointer to the online database (www.kent.gov.uk/HER). 12 Susan Lindley Chestnut Green Agree with extension of Chestnut Green to include Shorne Common Rough. Noted - NFA 13 Susan Lindley Chestnut Green The Borough Council should take a stronger lead on the planning for translating the suggestions into physical action. It is realised that funding is restricted and may have to come from many sources, if achievable. The site-specific actions should be worded more strongly, as Noted - NFA recommendations. 14 Susan Lindley Chestnut Green These have obviously taken a huge amount of detailed research and the author(s) should be thanked for their hard work. It would be nice if the authors could be listed somewhere. The maps, e.g. of water sources, are very interesting and overall the documents will be very useful for future Noted - NFA planning purposes. 15 Shorne Parish Council Chestnut Green The Parish Council as land owner has no objection in principle to the extension of the Conservation Area boundary to include Shorne Common Rough. Noted - NFA 16 Shorne Parish Council Chestnut Green Paragraph 9.6 refers. Welcomes the opportunity to investigate further the introduction of traffic calming in Shorne Ridgeway. Would stress that it would be opposed to the introduction of "Tables", "Cushions" and the like on the Ridgeway. Would like to investigate the extension of the footway on Noted - NFA the south side of the Ridgeway further to the east. 17 Kent County Council Chestnut Green Suggest an issue added to Section 9 - The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation to the prehistoric period, medieval and post-medieval periods. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Conservation Area and in the event of Noted - text to be added to Section 9 development proposals being submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

18 Graham Simpkin Planning Church Street Giles Dairy Farm is a working farm. Recently replacement buildings permitted. At Para 9.4, Higham reference should be made to working farm. Noted - amend text accordingly

19 Graham Simpkin Planning Church Street At paragraph 9.7 relating to Character Area 6, the area of common land is gradually being brought Higham back into use as grazing land. Noted - amend text accordingly

20 Graham Simpkin Planning Church Street In figure 9, the "L" shaped building within Giles Dairy Farm is a modern building on the site of a Higham historic farm building. It is therefore unclear what positive contribution this makes to the Noted - amend text accordingly Conservation Area. 21 Kent County Council Church Street Suggest an issue be added to section 9 - The Conservation Area contains known archaeological Heritage Conservation Higham sites relating to a Roman cemetery, early medieval pit and the medieval priory, church and village buildings. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Noted - amend text accordingly Conservation Area and in the event of development proposals being submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

Page 2 of 14 22 John Johnson Cobham Fully supportive Noted - No Further Action (NFA) 23 National Trust (Andrew Cobham Support for, but would like to see details of the traffic calming / enhancements opposite Owletts Any future traffic calming or enhancement schemes will be Shaw) National Trust property, to ensure setting of the building is enhanced publicised and consulted on - NFA 24 A Nailer Cobham There does not appear to be much consideration of the Halfpence Lane/The Street junction, particularly the setting of the war memorial - unique to the village and designed by one of its most influential residents. Recently there has been an increase in street furniture (for want of a better description) on the grass triangle which risks cluttering the area, detracting from the setting of the memorial and reducing the impact and perception of the vista along the Lime Avenue to Cobham Hall. Surfaces are discussed but street furniture in general does not really seem to be considered - Noted - referred to on page 43 and amend text on page 16 it may not currently be an issue in this conservation area but that does not mean that it will not have accordingly a negative impact in the future. I was surprised that the long view of the village from the south (Batts Road) is not mentioned. I had also expected to see some mention of the impact of horsiculture (and the buildings and vehicles associated with it), in the Cobhambury area.

25 A Nailer Cobham I'm not sure that a case is made for the continued inclusion of the southern part of the field south of Noted - The field is historically associated with the immediate Rookery Farm (or rather the property called Burleigh) in the conservation area. field boundary of Rookery Farm and follows the approach adopted for the north side fo the village - NFA 26 Kent County Council Cobham Suggest an Issue be added to Section 9 - The Conservation Area has archaeological potential Heritage Conservation relating to the prehistoric period, medieval and post-medieval periods. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Conservation Area and in the event of Noted - text to be added to Section 9 development proposals being submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

27 Gravesham Rights of Way Harvel The quality of the area has been damaged by the building of a huge modern house just outside the Committee (Patricia "boundary" Noted - NFA Luxford) 28 Gravesham Rights of Way Harvel The immediate approaches to the village are also important Committee (Patricia Noted - NFA Luxford) 29 Gravesham Rights of Way Harvel The area of the riding school to stop any further development (there are now two houses which Committee (Patricia have been given planning permission relating to this incursion on the village area) Noted - NFA Luxford) 30 Gravesham Rights of Way Harvel The pub has been a very good "centre" for the village and does not need "prettying up" Committee (Patricia Noted - NFA Luxford) 31 Joanne Latimer Harvel Whilst agreeing that the street frontage of the pub would benefit from some planting this must be maintained so as not to obscure access in and out of the car park and the view to passing motorists where there is already a bend in the road and the potential for traffic to be joining from the road Noted - NFA opposite

Page 3 of 14 32 Kent County Council Harvel Suggest an Issue be added to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential Heritage Conservation relating to the late medieval farmsteads of Crickfield Farm and Old Pond Farm. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Conservation Area and in the event of Noted - text to be added to Section 9 development proposals being submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

33 PDPDesign (Patrick Lower Higham Although previously considered I feel more of the canal should be included. As stated in 9.2 the thin Parnell) canal area to the south adjacent to the existing south western boundary should be included. I also feel the section north westward of the existing area should be reconsidered up to and including the Obelisk. There is a significant area of canal bank throughout this length which with some planning and effort could become a very attractive pedestrian walk area. This area is currently being The appraisal has considered and included a section of the considered by Network Rail to ascertain what areas they own and permissions for improvement by canal that responds to the existing conservation area boundary the Thames and Medway Canal Association. - NFA

34 PDPDesign (Patrick Lower Higham The canal route to the Obelisk as the canal was a major influence in the shaping of this area. Parnell) Noted - No Further Action (NFA)

35 PDPDesign (Patrick Lower Higham If not regulated somehow the volume of traffic will increase substantially when the re-development Parnell) of the Nuraltie buildings has been completed. As has been proved on many occasions Canal Road is inadequate now to cope with heavy plant and has become a major problem. To concede any change to the Canal and Towpath is against the TMCA aims, however if Canal Road were Acknowledged in the management plan as requiring an considerably widened whilst maintaining and restoring the canal bed and a small cycleway/towpath I appropriate traffic management scheme - NFA feel that these gains to the Canal would offset the new road development. Whatever happens traffic lights are required at the narrow section at the south eastern end of Canal Road adjacent to 'Verona'.

36 Katy Hanks Lower Higham I would say that what constitutes Lower Higham extends beyond the boundary of the Conservation Area and extends to include the houses on School Lane, Lake Drive and the Adelaide and leading out of the village on the road towards Chalk. Page 3 of the Appraisal does not make this particularly The reference is to the historic settlement rather than its clear and seems to suggest that lower Higham is only that part of the village that is included within modern extension. The Statement of Special Interest will be the conservation area. edited to clarify this.

37 Katy Hanks Lower Higham The Nuralite plant is not the only cause of large lorries - we also see a large amount of traffic from RS Skips along the lower Higham road. Noted - amend text accordingly 38 Katy Hanks Lower Higham On page 11 it states that the Railway Tavern remains as a pub, but very sadly this was closed last year and now stands empty with no clear plans as to its future. As a result, there is currently no Noted - amend text accordingly access to what was the car park for the pub, so page 17 needs to be updated. 39 Katy Hanks Lower Higham I think consideration should be given to extending it further - there are other older buildings nearby, e.g. Higham Hall and the related buildings, which don't appear to be covered by the Conservation Noted - The historic core of Lower Higham forms a distinct Area, also the older house with sloping gardens that is on School Lane just up from the station. area, separated by modern development. NFA

Page 4 of 14 40 Katy Hanks Lower Higham I'm not sure that the plans for the Railway Tavern are adequately assessed in light of it having Noted - Consent granted for conversion to residential - amend closed as a public house. text accordingly 41 Kent County Council Lower Higham Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation to the Thames and Medway Canal. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Conservation Area and in the event of development proposals being Noted - text to be added to Section 9 submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed. 42 Sava Medonos Meopham The Conservation Area should be extended to also include Culverstone Green. Noted - but the response does not explain why - NFA 43 Sava Medonos Meopham No further housing or industrial developments are needed or required in the Conservation Area and Noted - the objectives of preserving or enhancing the special any such attempts must be stopped. character and appearance of the conservation area must be assessed through the planning process - NFA 44 Dawn Bramer Meopham Description of the former boot and clothing stores building/Wellington Hotel/bakery/art gallery needs Green amending-now residential and financial services outlet(pg19), The Windmill cafe is now a cake baking/decoration outlet Pitfield Green is commonly known as Meopham Green with the small green opposite(with toilets) as Pitfield Green pg 20 South once more from the Victorian Terrace....entry now leads to a residential development Noted - amend text accordingly Pg 22 should Potfield Lodge be Pitfield Lodge? Barnside is a cattery and the shop at the front a water softening company. Pg 15 Across the road is an attractive milestone...... I could not locate this Pg 20 As the road curves...with a few white posts...... The posts are not white

45 Dawn Bramer Meopham The Baptist Chapel could be considered as a locally listed building Noted - this to form a part of a future project on local listing, Green subject to resources being available - NFA 46 Simon Westmacott Meopham There is reference at paragraph 9.6 to possible "traffic calming" measures at the south west corner Green of the Green. I live on the Green and would be vigorously OPPOSED to any such measures. The traffic at that pinch point is slow enough already, the A227 is extremely busy at times and any such hindrance to traffic flow would be a disaster, causing delays of up to several minutes. Added to Noted - amend text accordingly which such measures add to noise and pollution as traffic is forced to stop, possibly queue and re- start. As a pedestrian, I occasionally walk along that stretch of road and have no difficulty in crossing as necessary. 47 Kent County Council Meopham Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation Green to the windmill and any earlier structures, to three historic farmsteads and the use of the Green during the Second World War as a barrage balloon site. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered within the Conservation Area and in the event of development proposals Noted - text to be added to Section 9 being submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

48 Julia Burgoyne Meopham Hook Page 24 Negative Features. Should be added: Green The rough stone car park at the front of Waterditch detracts from and damages the overall setting of Noted - amend text accordingly the house and grounds.

Page 5 of 14 49 Julia Burgoyne Meopham Hook Page 25 Green 9.7 Enhancement Potential The rough stone car park at the front of Waterditch should be removed and replaced with Noted - amend text accordingly something more appropriate for an attractive historic building. 50 Julia Burgoyne Meopham Hook Page 14 6.1 Building Types. Green The 19th century 'serviced' building next to Victorian Nevill House HAS been modernised (to a high standard).This is identified as being unmodernsed. Noted - amend text accordingly

51 Stuart Poulton Meopham Hook I believe it should extend further West to include more properties in Melliker Lane, probably up to Green Longfield Road. Also Norwood Lane to the East has properties of character that need preserving. The conservation area boundary includes those buildings of character associated with Hook Green - NFA

52 Sally and Andrew Morgan Meopham Hook Should be extended to include the field behind Melliker Lane which extends to New Road and is a Not within the scope of conservation area designation no Green valuable green space. explanation given of architectural or historic interest - NFA 53 Laura Vines Meopham Hook I do not agree with 9.6:Highways and Traffic - there are no highway and traffic issues in the Green conservation area. I believe the level of traffic passing through this area has increased considerably over the past few years, with an increase in large HGV's travelling between the M20 and A2 respectively and would Noted - amend text accordingly like to see traffic calming measures installed or width restrictions in place to deter large industrial vehicles from travelling and consequentially speeding through the village.

54 Laura Vines Meopham Hook The document accompanying this consultation is too long and drawn out. In future it would be good Green to be provided with a 'summary' of proposals. Noted - No Further Action (NFA)

55 Paul Hancock Meopham Hook In the case of Hook Green, a reduction in the Conservation area would allow growth without Noted - Not clearly defined. Contradicts the purpose of Green affecting significantly the amenity provided by the Green and its immediate surroundings. conservation area designation - NFA 56 Valero Energy Corporation Meopham Hook I think the area should be extended further towards Meopham Station to included several of the Inc. (Gregory Pyemont) Green larger Victorian houses as they provide much to the character, appeal etc of the village. To allow major changes to these properties would be damaging to the area as a whole. I also feel that more The area in question is too fragemented and compromised by of Norwood lane (from Wrotham Road) should be included as there are also character properties modern development. NFA on this road not currently included in the area. 57 Kent County Council Meopham Hook Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation Green to Pleistocene deposits, medieval buildings and late medieval farmsteads. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered and in the event of development proposals being Noted - text to be added to Section 9 submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed.

58 Max Bramer Meopham The Agree with the proposal to extend the boundary to include the Victorian walled garden at Meopham Street Court-understand residents of Court are in favour of this and it is a unique feature currently partly Noted - No Further Action (NFA) used as a vineyard.

59 Sue Bush Meopham The Not sure where the farm buildings and old vicarage are covered in Shipley hills lane. Street Noted - No Further Action (NFA)

Page 6 of 14 60 Sue Bush Meopham The This report needs to call out options for stopping traffic using the A227 through Meopham as a rat Street run between the A2 and M20. Stopping sat nav's sending large lorries through the village and informing the Kent Police force that it is not an acceptable option to divert traffic through the village would be a good place to start. It will all be too late when there is an accident around the junction of Noted - Refer to management plan - NFA the Street and the A227and either the George or the Well House are irretrievably damaged.

61 Kent County Council Meopham The Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation Street to the prehistoric, Roman, early medieval and medieval periods. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered and in the event of development proposals being Noted - text to be added to Section 9 submitted appropriate archaeological mitigation may be needed. 62 Paul Hancock Queens Farm While Thong and Queens Farm have some interesting characteristics they are not unique. I wonder if the benefit of development into a modern community should take precedence over the small cost Noted - contradicts the purpose of conservation area of significant removal of the existing communities. designation - NFA 63 Susan Lindley Queens Farm Queens Farm - with increased traffic arising from Apex business park, and increased dwellings at the Farm outbuildings conversion, there is now perhaps a need here as well for traffic calming to Noted - amend text accordingly protect residents/pedestrians.

64 Susan Lindley Queens Farm The Borough Council should take a stronger lead on the planning for translating the suggestions into physical action. It is realised that funding is restricted and may have to come from many Noted - GBC seeks partnership funding opportunities were sources, if achievable. The site-specific actions should be worded more strongly, as possible - NFA recommendations. 65 Susan Lindley Queens Farm These have obviously taken a huge amount of detailed research and the author(s) should be thanked for their hard work. It would be nice if the authors could be listed somewhere. The maps, e.g. of water sources, are very interesting and overall the documents will be very useful for future Noted - NFA planning purposes.

66 Shorne Parish Council Queens Farm Would like to see more tree planting in the area and more effective screening of the modern agricultural buildings to the west of the conservation area Noted - amend text accordingly

67 Shorne Parish Council Queens Farm With the conversion of the former farm buildings to residential some improvement to Queens Farm Lane is desirable. Noted - amend text accordingly 68 Kent County Council Queens Farm Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation to the prehistoric, roman and Medieval periods. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered and in the event of development proposals being submitted appropriate Noted - text to be added to Section 9 archaeological mitigation may be needed.

69 Kent County Council Queens Farm I agree that the management recommendations will preserve or/and enhance the special character Heritage Conservation and appearance of the conservation areas Noted - NFA 70 Hilary Selby Shorne The 3 shops in Shorne now are Convenience Store, Hairdressers, Beauty Parlour also Lower Shorne inc Green Farm Lane, Coutts Avenue, Burdett Avenue, should come under the rural The review surveyed all areas of architecutral and historic conservation area, as Lower Shorne, is the most rural part of Shorne and is where the majority of interest - NFA wildlife lives and should have rural protection.

Page 7 of 14 71 Hilary Selby Shorne It should include the whole of Shorne, including Lower Shorne as per above answer The review surveyed all areas of architecutral and historic interest - NFA 72 Hilary Selby Shorne Lower Shorne, inc Green Farm Lane, Coutts Avenue and Burdett Avenue. Lower Shorne is the most rural part of Shorne, and the marshes and Shorne Fort is of particular historic and The review surveyed all areas of architecutral and historic environmental interest and needs rural protection. interest - NFA

73 Hilary Selby Shorne Shorne Village should be cut off from cut through traffic and become more pedestrianized. Too Acknowledged in the management plan as requiring an many cars are now just cutting through from A2 to A226 appropriate traffic management scheme - NFA 74 Hilary Selby Shorne The whole of Shorne (not just the Green and Village, but Lower Shorne as well) needs to be protected from cut through traffic, which is spoiling this little area. Too many heavy/large vehicles Acknowledged in the management plan as requiring an are coming through the village and down Green Farm Lane. appropriate traffic management scheme - NFA 75 Susan Lindley Shorne The Borough Council should take a stronger lead on the planning for translating the suggestions into physical action. It is realised that funding is restricted and may have to come from many Agreed - Funding is an issue and GBC seeks partnership sources, if achievable. The site-specific actions should be worded more strongly, as funding opportunities were possible - NFA recommendations.

76 Susan Lindley Shorne These have obviously taken a huge amount of detailed research and the author(s) should be thanked for their hard work. It would be nice if the authors could be listed somewhere. The maps, e.g. of water sources, are very interesting and overall the documents will be very useful for future Noted - NFA planning purposes.

77 Shorne Parish Council Shorne Request that the eastern boundary of the conservation area be reviewed with particular reference to A study of the map regression suggests that the boundary wall the wall between number 29 and 31 The Street. The wall is believed to be of historic interest in question was partially altered to the south between 1923 and possible in connection with the former manor. 1929. The northern section of the wqall inquestion forms the eastern edge of the conservation area. NFA 78 Shorne Parish Council Shorne Reference to paragraph 9.6. The Parish Council is mindful that any restrictions on parking may result in moving the vehicles to more vulnerable locations. Noted, amend text accordingly

79 Kent County Council Shorne Suggest adding an Issue to Section 9. The Conservation Area has archaeological potential relating Heritage Conservation to the prehistoric, Roman and Medieval periods. There is potential for further archaeological remains to be discovered and in the event of development proposals being submitted appropriate Noted - text to be added to Section 9 archaeological mitigation may be needed.

80 Susan Lindley Thong The Borough Council should take a stronger lead on the planning for translating the suggestions into physical action. It is realised that funding is restricted and may have to come from many Noted - Funding is an issue and GBC seeks partnership sources, if achievable. The site-specific actions should be worded more strongly, as funding opportunities were possible - NFA recommendations.

81 Susan Lindley Thong These have obviously taken a huge amount of detailed research and the author(s) should be thanked for their hard work. It would be nice if the authors could be listed somewhere. The maps, e.g. of water sources, are very interesting and overall the documents will be very useful for future Noted - NFA planning purposes. 82 R MAGUIRE Thong I think it could be enlarged by including the farm land between Thong and Riverview Park No explanation or justification given - NFA

Page 8 of 14 83 [Deleted] Roy Carlo Thong Whilst I agree that traffic calming measures and the introduction of pathways would be beneficial, they would have to be done sympathetically and it is difficult to see how this could be achieved Noted - Any traffic calming measure would form a part of without impinging on private land at the roadside of Thong Lane further public consultation - NFA

84 Martin Wilson Thong I'm only just on the verge of this area. It appears that it is unlikely to change much under the recommendations which is fine. The only thing I would add is the need to keep Shorne Ifield road Noted - KCC prosecutes fly tipping if evidence is found - NFA clear of flytipped waste, or even better to catch and apprehend the culprits

85 Paul Hancock Thong While Thong and Queens Farm have some interesting characteristics they are not unique. I wonder if the benefit of development into a modern community should take precedence over the small cost Noted - NFA of significant removal of the existing communities.

86 Christoph Bull Thong Consider Thong Lodge for inclusion in the conservation area, the last of the Darnley Estate Noted - Not possible to include due to remoteness from entrance gates and close to Thong Hamlet conservation area and historical land association with the conservation area. Consider for listing. 87 Christoph Bull The area of East Chalk should be seriously considered as a conservation area stretching from Castle Lane eastwards to border with Shorne including Filborough Farm, Filborough Cottages, The area in question is predominantly open farm land where Eastcourt Cottages, Eastcourt Manor, Church Lane, Sandpits in Lower Higham Road and building of architectural and historic significance are protected Deadman's Bottom. through listing. No architectural or historic justification given - NFA

88 Christoph Bull The conservation areas in Gravesham are a vital part in protecting Green Belt and stopping urban creep. Chalk and Thong especially important as they form the front line. Noted - NFA 89 Shorne Parish Council Thong Paragraph 9.7 refers. Welcomes the opportunity to investigate further the introduction of traffic calming in Thong. Would stress that it would be opposed to the introduction of "Tables", "Cushions" and the like on the Ridgeway. Would like to investigate the extension of the footway on the south Noted - NFA side of the Ridgeway further to the east.

90 Laura Hunter Rural (All) I agree with the issues and enhancement opportunities identified. Conservation Noted - NFA Management Plan 91 A Nailer Rural (Cobham) See previous comments re street furniture and the setting of the war memorial / Lime Conservation Avenue Noted - amend text accordingly Management Plan 92 Gravesham Rights of Way Rural (All) The character is also the people. Stop building huge houses and allow some cottages to be Committee (Patricia Conservation included Noted - NFA Luxford) Management Plan 93 Katy Hanks Rural (Lower Higham) I would be keen to see further development avoided, so that the area within the Conservation conservation boundary is preserved as a hamlet. If, however, the appearance of parts of that hamlet Management can be improved, sensitively, then I would be in favour of that. Noted - NFA Plan

Page 9 of 14 94 Dawn Bramer Rural (Meopham) The small green with toilet block contains a small rose garden. In recent times this has Conservation been poorly maintained by GBC meaning this year it was covered in weeds from March to Management September giving a very poor impression and also meaning the roses were never seen in bloom. Plan The toilet block too could be better maintained-moss on roof etc The small triangular green to the north of the main green is often used for parking despite the restricting posts and sat navs appear to result in vehicles turning in to the access road when they mean to access the road round the main green Noted - NFA The yellow salt/grit bin by the phone box is particularly garish and out of place-is a different colour possible?. Agree wholeheartedly with need for traffic calming and better pedestrian access at entry and exit to the conservation area on A227

95 Simon Westmacott Rural (All) I don't recall any particular recommendations. The Article 4 appendix didn't seem to be Conservation attached. Recommendations are included. List of Article 4 Directions is Management available. Plan 96 Laura Vines Rural (Meopham Hook Green) I believe the planting of shrubs around the car park of Bartellas would be Conservation ascetically pleasing and enhance the areas natural beauty. Noted - NFA Management Plan 97 Shorne Parish Council Rural Chapter 2 requires reviewing in light of changes to regulations. Para 2.3 out of date. Local Plan Conservation has interim approval until 2019 and Regional Plan withdrawn. Noted - amend text accordingly Management Plan 98 Shorne Parish Council Rural Reference to paragraph 3.6 detailed guidance for replacement windows, doors, etc would be Conservation welcomed by the Parish Council. Noted - NFA Management Plan 99 Shorne Parish Council Rural With reference to paragraph 4.4 a list of those conservation areas subject to Article 4 Directions Conservation would be useful. A list of Conservation Areas with Article 4 Directions is already Management available - Amend text accordingly. Plan 100 Shorne Parish Council Rural Would welcome the opportunity to discuss in more detail possible improvements to the Conservation Conservation Areas in the parish. Noted - confirm with GBC Management Plan 101 Kent County Council Rural Please notify Historic Environment Record of all conservation area amendments Heritage Conservation Conservation Agreed - on completion of the review all rural conservation Management area maps to be forwarded to the HER team. Plan 102 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 2 It is also important for relevant GBC staff to have an understanding of how Heritage Conservation Conservation archaeological remains and historic landscapes are managed during the development control Management process. To help this, we would suggest an annual meeting between the KCC Heritage Noted - GBC & KCC to action Plan Conservation team and GBC planning and conservation officers.

Page 10 of 14 103 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 3. The different policies and actions identified in the consultation document Heritage Conservation Conservation depend very heavily on the Borough’s Conservation Officer. Conservation and other services are Management under huge pressure in LPAs but it is important that there is sufficient capacity to provide Noted - Subject to resources - NFA Plan appropriate advice and influence policy. 104 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 4. Although we generally support this action, it is important that developers Heritage Conservation Conservation engaging in pre-application discussions with GBC are advised of the potential for their proposals to Management impact on archaeological remains, whether inside or outside the Conservation Areas. The Plan Conservation Area boundary is not defined with archaeology in mind yet because Conservation Areas tend to be historic in nature there is the potential for archaeological remains to exist both within and beyond them. The Design and Access statement should also include an assessment of this archaeological potential. A particular issue arises where new development may be under consideration within a farmstead in a Conservation Area. KCC has also been working with English Heritage (now Historic England) and the Kent Downs AONB to prepare guidance on how historic Noted - confirm with GBC farmsteads in Kent can be assessed for their suitability for new development or change of use. It is intended that the guidance is adopted by local authorities as part of their Local Plan or as a Supplementary Planning Document and we would encourage Gravesham Borough Council to do so. We would be happy to discuss this further. Where such development is permitted it is important that it is in keeping with the existing character in terms of size, layout, routeways, massing and materials and that any archaeological remains associated with former phases of use are treated appropriately in the development control process.

105 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 6. We support this action and would also ask that the KCC Conservation Heritage Conservation Conservation Architect be consulted on all Conservation Area appraisals at an early stage. Noted - NFA Management Plan 106 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Policy 1. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to “set out in their Local Plan a Heritage Conservation Conservation positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment”. There is Management considerable scope about how to do this but the most effective way may be to bring together all Plan policies and actions related to the historic environment into a Heritage Strategy. This allows the LPA to review the heritage resource, consider the main historic environment themes of relevance to the area and identify the heritage assets they comprise. The Strategy can also assess the main threats to the historic environment of the Borough and suggest ways in which it can be enhanced and exploited. Finally the Strategy provides an Action Plan and can be used to refine Policies to be adopted by the Local Plan. The advantage of this approach is that it fully integrates all aspects of Noted - NFA historic environment policy. It prevents it from being developed piecemeal and in a fragmented manner which can lead to the historic environment failing to play a full role in the life of the Borough.

Several LPAs in Kent either have a Heritage Strategy already or are in the process of developing one and KCC Heritage Conservation (who wrote the Dover Heritage Strategy) would be happy to discuss this further with Gravesham BC.

107 Kent County Council Rural Suggested wording for Policy 5. The Borough Council will continue to assess applications for Listed Heritage Conservation Conservation Building Consent in line with Borough Council policy and guidance provided in the NPPF including Management the preparation, where appropriate, of archaeological desk-based assessment and/or field Noted - text to be revised for Policy 5 Plan evaluation.

Page 11 of 14 108 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Policy 6. I support the establishment of a Local List as this will help the Borough Council Heritage Conservation Conservation to conserve the historic character of the area more effectively that by just relying on the statutory Management List. I also support the use of the community more widely in identifying and recording the heritage Plan assets that will be included on the List. The Historic Environment Record can be a key source of candidate assets for this process and should also be a destination for information about assets considered for the list. I would be happy to discuss how the KCC HER team can support this work.

I would suggest, however, that the List be expanded to include more than just historic buildings. This is becoming increasingly common as it allows the LPA to include historic spaces, landscape or urban features and archaeological sites on the List. It is thus often termed a ‘Local List of Heritage Noted - Supported subject to resources - NFA Assets’. KCC has recently worked with the Kent Gardens Trust in Tunbridge Wells, Sevenoaks, Medway and currently Dover to identify assets for inclusion on such lists. Volunteers from the Trust have examined available archive material for a range of designed landscapes and urban green spaces and assessed their heritage value against a range of criteria. For each a Statement of Significance was produced which has been used by the LPAs to support their planning work. We would be happy to discuss a similar project with Gravesham BC.

109 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Policy 9 - Same comments as Policy 6 Heritage Conservation Conservation Noted - Supported subject to resources - NFA Management Plan 110 Kent County Council Rural 4.4 The control of Scheduled Monuments and other archaeological features. Suggest the phrase Heritage Conservation Conservation “pay for an archaeological watching brief” be replaced with “carry out archaeological investigation Management and recording. This could include an archaeological watching brief or historic building recording.” Plan This is because it is not possible to insist that the developer pays – only that they ensure the work is properly carried out and because there are more options than just a watching brief. Suggested Noted - text to be revised for Policy 10 wording for Policy 10. The Borough Council will continue to monitor applications for development which affect Scheduled Monuments or sites of archaeological potential extremely carefully, and such applications may be refused if the significance of the site would be harmed by the proposals.

111 Kent County Council Rural I support the establishment of a Buildings at Risk register as this will be a useful tool in helping to Heritage Conservation Conservation conserve key heritage assets in the Borough. Noted - No Further Action (NFA) Management Plan 112 Historic England Rural 2.1 bullet point 4: This should now read: “Planning permission is now required for the substantial Conservation demolition of any unlisted building in a conservation area …” Management Noted - text to be revised Plan

Page 12 of 14 113 Historic England Rural 2.3 The South East Plan and the Kent and Medway Structure Plan are no longer relevant planning Conservation documents in this context and reference to them should now be removed. I would suggest the Management Conservation Area Appraisals will be considered as part of the evidence base of the emerging Plan Local Plan, whilst the Management Plan may form a Supplementary Planning Document rather than Noted - text to be revised a Development Plan Document. Various Supplementary Planning Guidance Documents prepared by the County Council may still be relevant documents, where they are recognised in the saved or emerging Local Plan policies. 113 Gravesham Borough Rural Chapter 2 requires reviewing in light of changes to regulations. Para 2.3 out of date. Local Plan Council Conservation has interim approval until 2019 and Regional Plan withdrawn. Management Noted - text to be revised Plan 114 Historic England Rural Action 2. It would be helpful to update references to English Heritage to our new title ‘Historic Conservation England’ Management Noted - text to be revised Plan 115 Historic England Rural Action 5. It might be helpful to task the Heritage Champion with overseeing the implementation of Conservation the Management Plan in order to ensure there is a focus to their role. Management Noted - text to be revised Plan 116 Historic England Rural Action 8. This seems a little indefinite. Is it now time to commit to establishing a Conservation Area Conservation Advisory Committee? It would be helpful for the Action to identify the desirable composition of the Management committee’s membership and how they will report to the Council or be consulted. For example a Plan four or six monthly meeting cycle to review major applications and or heritage at risk affecting the district’s conservation areas with publicly available minutes may provide a basis for an influential group without being overly time consuming. Membership may be made up of a mixed Noted - amend text accordingly representation of interested groups including amenity societies and special interest societies, as well as representatives of landowners or local planning consultancies to provide a balanced representation. Ideally the Heritage Champion would have a role as chair.

117 Historic England Rural Action 17. Having prepared the appraisals it should now be clear what additional guidance is Conservation required. We would recommend the action should now move forward to identify which documents Management the Council will produce with a target date for these to be completed by. The Management Plan Noted - amend text accordingly Plan should provide an opportunity for the Council to assess the costs of such projects and commit resources to these where they are a priority. 118 Historic England Rural 4.1 The Policies appear to be sound and provide a suitably robust approach Conservation Noted - NFA Management Plan

Page 13 of 14 119 Historic England Rural The conservation area specific policies are rather repetitive and this section might generally be Conservation rationalised further to identify proposals that are identified for all areas and those that are specific to Management individual conservation areas. Where proposals are identified for all areas it would also be helpful to Plan identify whether any areas are being given priority for action, possibly as a result of being identified as most at risk due to decay or development pressure. The requirement for article 4 directions, which have now been served, the preparation of a local list and the management of trees, are all discussed earlier in the document and could be removed to rationalise this section to just include Noted - NFA the features specific to each area. This might as readily be tabulated to identify a. the issue, b. how it is affecting the conservation area’s significance, c. a remedy that might be provided, and d. when this is expected to take place and who will be responsible for providing it. In each case it isn’t clear whether the discussion of uses and vitality should result in any action, it would be helpful to clarify this.

120 Kent Wildlife Trust Rural Recommend that Section 2 includes the need for any works to take into consideration the national Conservation legislation on protected species, in particular in relation to bat roosts within buildings, trees and Management hedgerows and the importance of undertaking works outside the sensitive seasons for both Noted - amend text accordingly Plan breeding birds and bats. 121 Kent Wildlife Trust Rural Recommend similar information inserted into section 4.2 and 4.4. Reference could be made to Conservation Natural England standing advice. Noted - amend text accordingly Management Plan 122 Natural England Rural Suggest reference to landscape and habitat features referenced in setting of CA's Data available Conservation on magic.gov Noted - amend text accordingly Management Plan

Page 14 of 14 Gravesham Borough Council Rural Conservation Areas Appraisals and Management Plan Public consultation 21 March - 17 April 2016 Schedule of representations with the council's response

No. Name Conservation Comment Response Area 1 Natural England (John All In October 2015, we responded on your Rural CAA document as follows. Lister) Most of the matters covered in the documents lie beyond our remit, and we are not well placed to comment. I recognise the need to protect the setting of the CAs and wonder if some reference to landscape and habitat features in that setting may be helpful. Much of our data of Noted - this was amended in the previous consulation things like BAP habitats (eg traditional orchards) is available on magic.gov.

On this basis we have not further comments 2 Environment Agency All Thank you for consulting us on the above. (Jennifer Wilson) We have reviewed the above and have no concerns with the content. Noted - No Further Action Kind regards 3 Southfleet Parish Council - (Northfleet Whilst Northfleet Green is not part of the consultation document, Southfleet Parish Council J Harding - Clerk Green) considers it should be included, as here has been a tremendous amount of building work that is not in keeping with this rural hamlet Noted. Outside the scope of this exercise, but to be included in the next round of appraisals, subject to resources.

4 Bob Lane Chestnut Green 9.2 Conservation Area Boundary Review. I strongly agree with the inclusion of Shorne Common Rough. Noted. The conservation area name to remain, due to its You may wish to consider changing the name of this conservation area to better reflect the familiarity. area it covers. 5 Pauline Clifton Chestnut Green Consultation Document 2016 9.6 Highways and traffic. In spite of the 30mph speed limit and the installation of the Noted - NFA. Shorne PC commented previously (item 16 on interactive sign on The Ridgeway, much of the traffic is travelling past my house at between previous consulation report): " Welcomes the opportunity to 40 and 50 mph. It is becoming increasingly difficult for me to drive my car off the parking investigate further the introduction of traffic calming in Shorne space in front of my house as nobody is prepared to give way. Ridgeway. Would stress that it would be opposed to the introduction of "Tables", "Cushions" and the like on the Ridgeway. Would like to investigate the extension of the footway on the south side of the Ridgeway further to the east."

6 St. Mary the Virgin Chestnut Green Traffic using the Ridgeway as a 'rat run'. I think there should be a speed camera positioned to Church, Chalk, Kent - catch speeding cars along Shorne Ridgeway since the current 30 mph speed indicator board Barbara Millatt, does not slow persistent offenders who ignore it.. Noted - See above

Page 1 of 8 7 Lisa Hooper Chestnut Green With regards to section 9.6 regarding traffic management, I would like to demonstrate my support for traffic calming measures along The Ridgeway. I have written to my local councillors in the past month to highlight my concerns of the unacceptable level of speeding along the road. The road is treated like motorway, it's a rat run to the a2, and people do not drive at the 30mph limit nor do they treat it as a residential road. I have recently moved to The Ridgeway and have been mortified at the speed that people drive down the road, I did not expect this to be the case along a 30mph road nor in a conservation area. My 3 year old is terrified every time I open the front door to take her to the car, and covers her ears at the sound to cars roaring past. My 6 month old baby had been woken in the night at the sound of car engines as the speed past our house. It is affecting our daily life and it should not be happening, as we moved to a 30mph road, not a motorway. There are no paths along the road, which again add to the the dangerous nature of what is take place on our road. You take Noted - See above your life into your own hands if you dare to walk down the road you live on. Something needs to be done to deal with this problem. Cobham has been given adequate thought when it comes to this issue. Why not The Ridgeway? Traffic calming will protect the conservation area as it will encorage more responsible driving and ensure it is given the respect it deserves. We used to live in windmill hill, another conservation area and also another 30mph road. These problems would never have occurred along that road as it was not possible for cars to drive along there so quickly due to it being narrow. Which again suggests that traffic calming measure such as the ones in cobham would be effective at slowing down the traffic. Something must be done to ensure the ridgeway does not just become a speeders highway whilst residents and their homes suffer.

8 Susan Lindley - Shorne Chestnut Green - Section 5.1.2 Extension to include Shorne Common Rough: Parish Council Maps The parish Council is pleased that this is to happen but needs to point out that the plan in the document is incorrect as an error has crept into the OS basemap at some point after 1983. This was fully investigated in the Parish Council's response to the recent planning application number GR/2015/1031.

Historically, it would appear that at some time in the past Venesta might have encroached on the Common. In 1983 when the Darnley Trust sold the Common to the Parish Council, at the same time a small strip of land was sold to Venesta but that strip is still subject to "Subject to all existing common rights and all existing rights of way."

At this time we believe that the correct boundary of the Common and therefore the newly Noted - Boundary to be adjusted to follow the western fence of extended Conservation Area should be taken as being the western fence of Venesta which is Vanesta a straight line with a curve to the east at the Woodlands Lane end reflecting the previous cart track. This annotated extract from the Parish Council's Deed Plan (e-mailed separately as can't be pasted into this response) shows in green what we believe should be the correct eastern boundary for the conservation area.

As can be seen, the boundary stated above is indicated on the base plan as being a recognisable boundary and the land east of the footpath is shown as linked to the main part of the common.

We will be pleased to discuss this further as needed.

Page 2 of 8 9 Susan Lindley - Shorne Chestnut Green - Chestnut Green Conservation Area – Section 5.1.6 Highways and traffic/parking: Parish Council Management Plan Residents are experiencing problems due to parking obstructing sight lines, speeding and Noted - Highways & Traffic are under the remit of KCC. Text increasing numbers of business vehicles using the village as a through route. We suggest that altered in Highways and Traffic/Parking, 5.1.6, Page 19 of the as stated elsewhere (e.g. for Thong under section 5.11.6) a "comprehensive traffic calming Management Plan scheme" is also needed here.

10 Michael Donovan Church Street Map purporting to identify Higham Common. The above map shows this as being northwest of Noted - The Higham Common is bisected by the railway line, Higham the railway, where the other maps identify it as being within the conservation area, to the and only the part south of the railway line is included in the southeast of the railway. conservation area. NFA 11 Michael Donovan Lower Higham Maps, and text on P11. I cannot recall there being a railway crossover at the London end of Higham (and I've been involved in the railway for just short of fifty years!). An Ordnance Survey issue, no doubt. Contrary to the statement, the Railway Tavern is no longer open, and appears to be being converted into residential use.

Noted - Railway Tavern text revised after first consulation. NFA

12 Michael Donovan Meopham para 9.6. A proper footpath along the road, and a pedestrian crossing, would help. Noted - Highways and Traffic are under the remit of KCC. Green Traffic measures and footway improvements are referred to. NFA 13 Susan Lindley - Shorne Queens Farm Queens Farm Conservation Area – Section 5.8.6: - see Appendix 1 of this document Parish Council Management Plan Noted - Highways and Traffic are under the remit of KCC. Text revised in Highways and Traffic, 5.8 6, page 30 of the Management Plan

14 Hilary Selby Shorne Methodist Chapel. The chapel was converted into a residence a few years ago. Noted - Text revised in Appendix 1, page 31 of the Shorne Conservation Area Appraisal

15 Susan Lindley - Shorne Shorne Shorne Conservation Area – Section 5.9.6: Parish Council Management Plan We disagree with the statement under section 5.9.6 that "vehicle speeds through the village are low" as our experience is that speeds through the village tend to be excessive when parked cars are not in place. A 20mph zone might be appropriate here. The parking problems Noted - Highways and Traffic are under the remit of KCC. Text due to the school and village hall block driveways and obstruct traffic and sightlines, and revised in Highways and Traffic, 5.9.6, page 31 of the cause a lot of frustration to residents near these locations with the southern end of The Street Management Plan and side roads additionally affected. Business traffic to Apex Business Park on Queens Farm Road is increasingly traveling through the village. We suggest that as stated elsewhere (e.g. for Thong under section 5.11.6) a "comprehensive traffic calming scheme" is also needed here.

Page 3 of 8 16 Susan Lindley - Shorne Thong Thong Lane Conservation Area: Parish Council No additional comments. Noted - NFA

17 Mr W.J.Elliott Thong Regarding Spatial Analysis 7.2 - see Appendix 2 of this document Any pre-planning application consultation advice on proposals for development within the conservation area and the green belt are based on the information submitted. No design proposals were submitted with the pre-application inquiry and therefore weight had to be given to the protection of green belt policy. On balance, based on the lack of information submitted, the conclusion was therefore to retain the status quo. 18 Kent County Council Rural General Heritage Conservation Conservation We were pleased to see that all the recommended changes that we made in our original Management consultation response in 2015 have been incorporated in the text. We support all of these Plan amendments. We will, however, reiterate some of the additional points that we originally made below in the hope that they can be picked up after the process has completed. (See 19, 20 , 21, 22, and 23) Noted - NFA

19 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 2 It is also important for relevant GBC staff to have an understanding of how Heritage Conservation Conservation archaeological remains and historic landscapes are managed during the development control Management process. To help this, we would suggest an annual meeting between the KCC Heritage As previously stated in the first consulation - Noted - GBC & Plan Conservation team and GBC planning and conservation officers. KCC to action

20 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 4. Although we generally support this action, it is important that developers Heritage Conservation Conservation engaging in pre-application discussions with GBC are advised of the potential for their Management proposals to impact on archaeological remains, whether inside or outside the Conservation Plan Areas. The Conservation Area boundary is not defined with archaeology in mind yet because Conservation Areas tend to be historic in nature there is the potential for archaeological remains to exist both within and beyond them. The Design and Access statement should also include an assessment of this archaeological potential. A particular issue arises where new development may be under consideration within a farmstead in a Conservation Area. KCC has also been working with English Heritage (now Historic England) and the Kent Downs AONB to As previously stated in the first consulation - Noted - confirm prepare guidance on how historic farmsteads in Kent can be assessed for their suitability for with GBC new development or change of use. It is intended that the guidance is adopted by local authorities as part of their Local Plan or as a Supplementary Planning Document and we would encourage Gravesham Borough Council to do so. We would be happy to discuss this further. Where such development is permitted it is important that it is in keeping with the existing character in terms of size, layout, routeways, massing and materials and that any archaeological remains associated with former phases of use are treated appropriately in the development control process.

Page 4 of 8 21 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Action 6. We support this action and would also ask that the KCC Conservation Heritage Conservation Conservation Architect be consulted on all Conservation Area appraisals at an early stage. Noted - NFA Management Plan 22 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Policy 1. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to “set out in their Local Plan Heritage Conservation Conservation a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment”. There is Management considerable scope about how to do this but the most effective way may be to bring together Plan all policies and actions related to the historic environment into a Heritage Strategy. This allows the LPA to review the heritage resource, consider the main historic environment themes of relevance to the area and identify the heritage assets they comprise. The Strategy can also assess the main threats to the historic environment of the Borough and suggest ways in which it can be enhanced and exploited. Finally the Strategy provides an Action Plan and can be used to refine Policies to be adopted by the Local Plan. The advantage of this approach is that Noted - NFA it fully integrates all aspects of historic environment policy. It prevents it from being developed piecemeal and in a fragmented manner which can lead to the historic environment failing to play a full role in the life of the Borough.

23 Kent County Council Rural Regarding Policy 6. We support the establishment of a Local List as this will help the Borough Heritage Conservation Conservation Council to conserve the historic character of the area more effectively that by just relying on Management the statutory List. I also support the use of the community more widely in identifying and Plan recording the heritage assets that will be included on the List. The Historic Environment Record can be a key source of candidate assets for this process and should also be a destination for information about assets considered for the list. I would be happy to discuss how the KCC HER team can support this work.

We would suggest, however, that the List be expanded to include more than just historic As previously stated in the first consulation - Noted - buildings. This is becoming increasingly common as it allows the LPA to include historic Supported subject to resources - NFA spaces, landscape or urban features and archaeological sites on the List. It is thus often termed a ‘Local List of Heritage Assets’. KCC has recently worked with the Kent Gardens Trust in Tunbridge Wells, Sevenoaks, Medway and currently Dover to identify assets for inclusion on such lists. Volunteers from the Trust have examined available archive material for a range of designed landscapes and urban green spaces and assessed their heritage value against a range of criteria. For each a Statement of Significance was produced which has been used by the LPAs to support their planning work. We would be happy to discuss a similar project with Gravesham BC. 24 Gravesham Borough All It should be noted under the Issues sections referred to in Highways and Traffic that these Council recommendations are within the remit of KCC and subject to their funding arrangements and Noted - text revised to make reference to KCC's remit in further consultation with borough and parish councils. Highways and Traffic.

25 Historic England All Thank you for your email dated 18 March 2016 consulting us on your intention of carrying out a SEA/SA for the above plan. In light of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations Noted - NFA 2004, our view is that a SEA is not required in this instance. 26 Gravesham Borough Lower Higham test revised on pages 13 Council CA Revised pages 13 due to new development withing the conservation area

Page 5 of 8 27 Gravesham Borough Management Management Plan: Generic Action by GBC Action 7 Assessment subject to availability of text amended Council Plan resources. 28 Gravesham Borough Management 9.3 Consideration should be given to amending the Article 4 Direction to encompass all With the recent residential conversion of the barn and associated Council Plan 5.8.3 elevations of the farmhouse, as this building is readily experienced 'in the round' and has its agricultural buildings permitted developments rights have been Queens Farm earliest fabric to the side and rear elevations removed for any further alterations and the Article 4 Direction is not CA 9.3 solely relied on for these buildings. 29 Gravesham Borough All GBC actions will be subject to available resources Noted and amended in documents Council 30 Gravesham Borough Management Updated text to reflect existance of Articles 4's in most areas. Noted and amended in document Council Plan

Page 6 of 8 No 13 - Susal Lindley, Shorne Parish Council Appendix 1 We disagree with statement under section 5.8.6 that there are no highway and traffic issues, the traffic passing through Queens Farm conservation area has increased considerably and conflicts with residents and recreational users of the road (access to the marshes and cycle route via Shornemead Crossing). We consider that some form of pedestrian/cycle protection and traffic calming, to reduce speeds, may also be appropriate there.

Shorne Conservation Area – Section 5.9.6:

We disagree with the statement under section 5.9.6 that "vehicle speeds through the village are low" as our experience is that speeds through the village tend to be excessive when parked cars are not in place. A 20mph zone might be appropriate here. The parking problems due to the school and village hall block driveways and obstruct traffic and sightlines, and cause a lot of frustration to residents near these locations with the southern end of The Street and side roads additionally affected. Business traffic to Apex Business Park on Queens Farm Road is increasingly traveling through the village. We suggest that as stated elsewhere (e.g. for Thong under section 5.11.6) a "comprehensive traffic calming scheme" is also needed here.

No 17 - Mr W J Elliott Appendix 2 3: Comment – Gravesham Rural Conservation Area Appraisals – THONG HAMLET

You state in your review our pair of prefabricated agricultural buildings (one built in the 1950’s the other in 1980’s at the south of the area, have negative features along with the modern open yard space. The yard is used for loading and unloading and on rare occasions overnight parking if the drivers hours are up or a breakdown occurs. Today 31 ton gross agricultural tractors and 44 ton artics are standard equipment, therefore it is crucial that no further road obstructions are put on our right of way especially as longer hauls and larger vehicles are to be used in the near future (Re Common Market rules) which will be out of my control. The authorities’ negative attitude towards our site forces us to continue its use.

I have done my best to avoid confrontation with the authorities and Thong residents, which is why I asked Jane Scott of Hobbs Parker to seek the councils pre-application advice regarding the replacement of the isolated prefabricated agricultural buildings and the unwanted noise from the grain dryer with a small residential scheme including parking areas designed in keeping with the hamlet of Thong. This could have been more appropriate and safer for all concerned. Sadly the council concluded in their letter of 18th January 2016 Ref: PRE20150835 states whilst it is accepted that the level of detail provided in the submission is limited and a response is only requested at this stage on the principal of the proposal it is concluded that a residential scheme here would probably have to be treated as inappropriate development in the green belt for the reasons set out above.

May I respectively remind the planning authority that I have already lost over the thousand green belt-green fields Defra registered acres in my name for what senior ministers and planning authorities call progress on over 70 projects on my tenanted farms. Today you can see Redrow grading the last 55 acres of New Barn Farm, Swanscombe of its green fields that were Defra registered in my name plus its trees and hedges that senior ministers and all in authority have called a Brown field site overnight. The owners are Nat Grid. On another site SOUTH of the A2 works is to start on 20 acres of green belt fields Defra registered in my name for the new Garden City NORTH of the A2. Owner Tarmac Cement and Lime Ltd. We have also been notified by Highways England that a new network of roads regarding Bluewater which includes a new lane each side of the A2 which are again green belt-green fields Defra registered in my name. Owner Crown Estates (Oxshott). My family will be involved in Paramount if it goes ahead. I hope not as it will destroy their property and business which my grandfather started in 1897/8. Paramount has promised to rebuild the property on another site, which is now unlikely to happen owing to today’s inadequate planning laws that only support rich city quangos leaving individuals without local authorities help and support to replace their 5 acre site elsewhere.

Page 7 of 8