PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR 1st NOVEMBER 2001 Page No. 1 MC2001/0504 Frindsbury Extra & Chattenden Outline application for demolition of site buildings and construction of twelve 3-bedroomed houses with garages. Land adjacent to Ridge Cottage, Lower Rochester Road, Frindsbury, Kent, ME3 8EW 1

2 MC2001/0553 Town Residential development comprising 23 x 2 bedroomed flats in a five storey block with parking Rochester Windows Building, Star Hill, Rochester, Kent 7

3 MC2001/0573 Thames Side Erection of six detached 4-bedroomed houses with integral garages Land at 24 and rear of 26 to 38 Higham Road, Cliffe, Rochester, Kent 14

4 MC2001/0802 Earl Construction of a two storey block comprising eight 1-bedroomed flats Land adjacent to Elaine Court, Elaine Avenue, Strood, Rochester, Kent 21

5 MC2001/0877 Frindsbury Extra & Chattenden Extension to building to provide warehouse and new goods in/out bay, canopy, relocation of security hut and weighbridge Veetee House, Neptune Close, Frindsbury, Rochester, Kent. ME2 4LT 25

6 MC2001/0891 All Saints Conversion of detached Summer room/gymnasium to self contained "granny annexe" Bush House, Ratcliffe Highway, St. Mary Hoo, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8RJ 29

7 MC2001/1380 All Saints Outline application for the construction of one detached house with attached garage Land at Tudor Farm, Stoke Road, Upper Stoke, Rochester, Kent 33

8 MC2001/1475 Town Change of use from retail (Class A1) to hot food takeaway (Class A3) 12 Medway Street, Chatham, Kent, ME4 4HA 36

9 MC2001/1483 St Margarets & Borstal Demolition of existing garage/store and construction of a two storey side extension to form granny annexe 29 Priestfields, Rochester, Kent, ME1 3AB 39

BACKGROUND PAPERS

The relevant background papers relating to the individual applications comprise: the applications and all supporting documentation submitted therewith; and items identified in any Relevant History and Information section and Representations section with a report.

Any information referred to is available for inspection in the Planning Offices of the Council at the Compass Centre, Chatham Maritime, Chatham.

1. MC2001/0504

Date Received: 27th March 2001

Location: Land adjacent to Ridge Cottage, Lower Rochester Road, Frindsbury, Kent, ME3 8EW

Proposal: Outline application for demolition of site buildings and construction of twelve 3-bedroomed houses with garages.

Applicant: Millplace Limited The Vines Roxley Road Walderslade Chatham Kent ME5V9JG

Agent: Mr L R D Simmons 46 Downsview Chatham Kent ME5 0AL

Ward: Frindsbury Extra & Chattenden

Recommendation

A. The applicant entering into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a payment of £24,000 towards the provision of educational facilities; and

B. The following conditions:-

(as amended by plan received on 6th September 2001)

1 Approval of the details of siting, design and external appearance of the building(s) and the landscaping (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

2 Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in Condition 1 above shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority for approval. Such application for approval shall be made to the Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission and the reserved matters shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

4 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the buildings are occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

DC0902MW 1

5 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

6 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include- proposed finished levels of contours; hard surfacing materials; minor artifacts and structures (e.g. external furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage, power, communications cables, pipelines etc. indicating lines, manholes, supports etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration where relevant. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with grass and plant establishment, aftercare and maintenance); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; and implementation programme.

7 All hard and soft landscape works 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 or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

8 Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted an investigation shall be undertaken to determine the nature and extent of any contamination. The results of the investigation together with a risk assessment by a competent person and details of a scheme to contain, treat or remove any contamination as appropriate, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented and a completion report issued by the competent person referred to above, stating how remediation has been completed and that the site is suitable for the permitted use, shall be provided to the Authority prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

9 No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until that part of the service road which provides access to it has been constructed in accordance with the approved details.

10 The details to be submitted in pursuance of Condition 01 shall show adequate land, reserved for the parking or garaging of vehicles and upon approval of the details, no permanent development, whether or not permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order), shall be carried out on the land so shown (other than the erection of a private garage or garages) or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to the reserved vehicle parking area.

11 Vision splay(s) of 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access point(s) and no obstruction of sight more than 0.6 metres above carriageway level shall be permitted within the splay(s).

DC0902MW 2 Site Description

This application relates to a former quarry, which forms a triangular site at the junction of Lower Rochester Road and Dillywood Lane. The site is accessed via a driveway off Lower Rochester Road, which slopes down into a former quarry. It is currently occupied by a variety of industrial type buildings most of which date from around the 1950’s/1960’s. Most of these buildings would appear to be unoccupied, although one is currently used as a dwelling. Due to the fact that the site has been excavated, the buildings are at a lower level than the prevailing ground level and the site is surrounded by vegetation. The existing buildings are hardly visible from outside the application site. In the south-western corner of the triangle, outside the application site, there is a detached bungalow, known as Ridge Cottage.

Proposal

The application has been submitted in outline form with all matters, other than means of access, reserved for future consideration. Vehicular access would be achieved via the existing access off Lower Rochester Road.

An illustrative drawing shows that all of the existing buildings would be demolished and a new road would be constructed leading from the vehicular access. The proposal has been amended to reduce the number of dwellings from 13 to 12 and the development (as amended) would comprise six pairs of semi-detached houses, five of which would face onto a cul-de-sac with one pair fronting Lower Rochester Road. All of the proposed dwelling would be served directly of the new road.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.27 hectare (0.66 acre) Site density: 44 d.p.h. (18 d.p.a.)

Relevant Planning History

TH6/64/327 : Erection of steel framed storage building Approved 11th November 1964

TH6/65/307 : Demolition of building and erection of store shed extension. Approved 11th November 1965

TH6/69/341 : Demolition of bungalow and ancillary buildings and erection of caretaker’s house/new works. Approved 11th December 1970

ME/75/48 : Erection of a new office Approved 13th March 1975

ME/77/236 : Outline application for store for box making materials and off loading area. Approved 20th May 1977

DC0902MW 3 ME/77/236A : Details pursuant for store for box-making materials and offloading area. Approved 14th November 1977

ME/87/1139 : Proposed erection of a workshop for box making (to replace existing. Approved 17th December 1987

Representations

Frindsbury Extra Parish Council has written objecting to the application on the grounds: -

- the application is contrary to the Local Plan. - overdevelopment of the site. - there are concerns over the access onto the B2000.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written objecting on the grounds of: -

- over intensification of a rural area. - unsuitable road conditions at a dangerous junction. - the site is outside any settlement.

2 letters have been received from local residents objecting on the grounds: - - the development is inappropriate in the countryside. - the existing use of the site (Class B2) is unauthorised. - the clearance of the site would exacerbate the existing problems of noise, disturbance, smoke etc.

1 letter has been received supporting the application on the grounds that any use that does not involve heavy goods vehicles using the site on a regular basis is preferable to the existing use.

All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans and the Dickens Country protection Society has written re-iterating its earlier objections.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996:

Policy ENV1 (Countryside) Policy T17 (Parking) Policy RS1 (Development in the Countryside) Policy RS5 (Development in the Countryside)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992:

Policy C1 (Rural Areas) Policy C2 (Redevelopment of Redundant Buildings) Policy C13 (Areas of Special Significance for Agriculture) Policy T13 (Car Parking)

DC0902MW 4

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999:

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE24 (Contaminated Land) Policy BNE26 (Development in the Countryside) Policy BNE35 (Areas of Local Landscape Importance) Policy T12 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The application site lies outside the built confines of any settlement as identified on the Proposals Maps to both the adopted Local Plan and the Medway Towns Local Plan 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). Any development, therefore, falls to be assess against Policy RS5 of the Structure Plan, Policy C1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE26 of the emerging Local Plan, which contain a presumption against development in the countryside unless, certain specified criteria can be met. Regard should also be paid to Policy C2 of the adopted Local Plan, which contains a presumption against the redevelopment of redundant buildings and non-conforming uses in rural areas unless: (i) it is clearly demonstrated that the existing buildings are incapable of reasonable economic conversion or re-use; (ii) the existing buildings are by virtue of their condition, appearance or use of a nature that substantially detracts from the character of the rural area; and (iii) the design and scale of the proposed redevelopment and the nature and level of the proposed use is sympathetic to the character of the rural area and will not give rise to further encroachment or an increase in activity that would be detrimental to the rural area.

It is considered that the existing buildings are no longer capable of reasonable economic use and in terms of both their appearance and use detract from the character of the area, as is evidenced from the letters of representation received. The footprint of the proposed dwellings, at 562 sq. metres, would be approx. 65% of that of the existing buildings and they would be less bulky. Being located below the prevailing ground level, the proposed dwellings would not be visible other than from the entrance to the site.

In terms of design and appearance and impact on neighbouring properties, the proposal falls to be assess against Policies BNE1 and BNE2 of the emerging Local Plan. Although the application is in outline form, it is considered that the site could be developed in a satisfactory manner. The nearest residential properties are Cobbs Cottages, immediately to the north. It is considered that the residential development of this site would not detract from the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties by reason of any overshadowing, loss of outlook and loss of privacy. It is further considered that the removal of the non-conforming industrial use would improve the amenities of the occupiers of those properties.

The site lies within an Area of Special Significance for Agriculture as identified under Policy C13 of the adopted Local Plan. This notation has not been carried into the emerging Local Plan, because of the changes in national agricultural policy that have occurred. The site is identified as lying within the Hogmarsh Valley Area of Local Landscape Importance, as identified under Policy BNE35. However, the proposed development would not prejudice the open character and landscape function of this area, and its impact would be less detrimental than the existing development.

DC0902MW 5 The submitted layout plan shows parking of two cars per dwelling and in this regard the proposal would comply with the adopted vehicle parking standards and with the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy T12 of the emerging Local Plan.

The vehicular access to serve the proposed development, would be located approx. 20 metres north of the junction with Dillywood Lane (east) and approx. 35 metres north of the junction with Dillywood Lane (west). This road would not comply with adoption standards due to its proximity to existing junctions and it gradient. However, having regard to the revision to reduce the number of units to 12, it is considered that a private drive to serve the development would be acceptable. No highway objection is therefore raised to the application.

Applying the standard pupil product ratios to this proposal a need for 6 primary and 2 secondary school places is identified. The applicant has offered to contribute £24,000 which amounts to 4 primary school places. Any further contribution would seriously undermine the viability of the scheme and it is considered that as the proposed houses would have very small private garden areas, the development would not generally be aimed at families with children. Having regard to the provisions of Policy S9 of the Structure Plan and Policy S6 of the emerging Local Plan, it is considered that a developer contribution should be sought by way of a Section 106 Obligation.

The application is recommended for approval subject to the applicant entering into the aforementioned Section 106 Obligation.

DC0902MW 6

2. MC2001/0553

Date Received: 30th March 2001

Location: Rochester Windows Building, Star Hill, Rochester, Kent

Proposal: Residential development comprising 23 x 2 bedroomed flats in a five storey block with parking

Applicant: Murston Construction Ltd 44 Upper Demark Road Ashford Kent

Agent: Mr G Hollaway Cheney & Thorpe The Tramway Stables Rampart Road Hythe Kent CT21 5BG

Ward: Town

Recommendation - Approval Subject to:

A. The applicant entering into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a payment of £60,000 towards the provision of educational facilities; and

B. The following conditions:

(as amended by plans received on 27th July 2001)

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 The work of demolition herein approved shall not take place before a contract for the carrying out of works of redevelopment of the site has been made and entered into and planning permission has been granted for such works covering the whole site and such a contract is capable of being implemented.

4 Prior to the commencement of any construction works on site, precautions shall be taken in accordance with a scheme of details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to protect the trees that adjoin the southern boundary to the site and that are located within the curtilage of number 15 Star Hill. The submitted scheme of details shall include details of the method for any excavation works that need to be undertaken within the root spread of the aforementioned trees. The works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved scheme fo details.

DC0902MW 7 5 No development shall take place until the developer has secured the implementation of a watching brief to be undertaken by an archaeologist approved by the Local Planning Authority so that the excavation is observed and items of interest and finds are recorded. The watching brief shall be in accordance with a written programme and specification which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Authority.

6 Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted an investigation shall be undertaken to determine the nature and extent of any contamination. The results of the investigation together with a risk assessment by a competent person and details of a scheme to contain, treat or remove any contamination as appropriate, shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented and a completion report issued by the competent person referred to above, stating how remediation has been completed and that the site is suitable for the permitted use, shall be provided to the Authority prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

7 The development shall not be occupied until space has been laid out within the site for cars to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear in accordance with plans hereunder approved by the Local Planning Authority.

8 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking shall be kept available for such use and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on the land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved parking space.

9 Before the development hereby permitted commences a scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from road traffic noise shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and all works which form part of the approved scheme shall be completed before any part of the development is occupied and thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development.

Site Description

This application relates to the Rochester Windows factory, located at the junction of Star Hill and Orange Terrace. It is a brick built structure, probably constructed in the 1950’s, that is currently used for the manufacture of windows. The building is tight to the pavement on both the Star Hill and Orange Terrace frontages, with a vehicular access to each of those roads.

Adjoining the building to the west is a triangular planted area, whilst to the south, the site is adjoined by 15 Star Hill, a three storey Edwardian building which is occupied as student accommodation in accordance with planning permission MC2000/0428, granted on 23rd August 2000. There are three trees: a lime, common horse chestnut and a red horse chestnut, within the curtilage of that property which overhang the application site. Beyond 15 Star Hill, there is a terrace of 12 four storey Georgian houses, which are listed Grade II.

DC0902MW 8 Immediately to the rear (east) there is a car park serving Orange Terrace, which comprises a row of 8 three storey Georgian houses. To the north is the public highway (Orange Terrace), beyond which lies: the Star Public House; the rear gardens to numbers. 208 –212 (even) High Street; Rochester Gate a 5/6 storey block containing 56 elderly persons flats and a public car park.

Proposal

The proposal, as amended, is for the demolition the existing factory building and the construction of a 5/6 storey block, including a basement containing 26 car parking spaces with access onto Orange Terrace. The proposed block would accommodate 23 two-bedroom flats, comprising five flats on each of the first five floors and three flats on the top floor. (The originally submitted application was for 25 flats). Pedestrian access would be on the Star Hill frontage, via a glazed stairway which will form the central corner elevation to this frontage.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.06 hectare (0.148 acre) Site density: 383 u.p.h.(155 u.p.a.)

Representations

The application has been advertised on site and in the press as a Major Development and as Development affecting a Conservation Area. Letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of: 1-8 (consec) Orange Terrace; 15, 10, 12, The Flat 12, 14-24 (even), 24a, 24b, 24c and the Star Inn, Star Hill; 202, 204, 206, 208 and 212 High Street; and 1-56(consec) Rochester Gate. Letters have also been sent to the Environment Agency, Southern Water Services, the City of Rochester Society, St. Margaret’s Banks Residents Association and Star Hill to Sun Pier Traders.

The Environment Agency has written raising no objection subject to the imposition of conditions relating to a contamination investigation, control of water pollution and the conservation of water resources.

Southern Water has written raising no objection, subject to the imposition of a condition relating to the method of surface water disposal.

Letters have been received from the City of Rochester Society, the Landlords of Rochester Gate, Rochester Gate Residents Association, Rochester Independent College and 31 local residents, objecting on the following grounds: -

- the design of the scheme is inappropriate. - the proposal would be detrimental to the visual amenities and character of the area, which contains Listed buildings. - the entire area, apart from the application site, is a Conservation Area. - the proposal would affect the trees on the adjoining site. - the development would be twice as high as the neighbouring development in Orange Terrace and does not respect the roofline in Star Hill. - overshadowing of neighbouring properties in Orange Terrace and Rochester Gate will occur. - inadequate parking will result in overflow parking in Orange Terrace. - Orange Terrace is narrow and unsuitable as a vehicular access.

DC0902MW 9 - additional traffic and pollution. - un-neighbourly overlooking to Rochester Gate will arise. - loss of outlook. - the development would cause serious disruption to the area. - development should be reduced to a three-storey development of 12 to 15 flats.

Following the receipt of amended plans re-consultations have been undertaken and nine further letters, including one from the landlords of Rochester Gate have been received re- iterating previously cited objections and stating that the reduction in unit numbers has not overcome these concerns and the development will adversely affect the integrity of an adjoining boundary wall.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996:

Policy S9 (Infrastructure and Community Services) Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy ENV17 (Conservation Areas) Policy ENV18 (Archaeological Sites) Policy T17 (Parking) Policy T19 (Access onto Primary Road)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992

Policy H6 (Relocation of Commercial Uses) Policy T13 (Car Parking) Policy B4 (Development Affecting a Conservation Area) Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B18 (New Residential Development) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999

Policy S6 (Planning Obligations) Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE3 (Noise Standards) Policy BNE4 (Energy Efficiency) Policy BNE15 (Development Affecting Conservation Areas) Policy BNE22 (Archaeological Sites) Policy BNE24 (Contaminated Land) Policy H5 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy H6 (High Density Housing) Policy T2 (Access to the Highway) Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

This application relates to the redevelopment of a site, currently in industrial use for residential purposes. The site lies within an area of mixed uses, with a significant residential element, but that also includes offices, retail and food and drink uses. The principle of the

DC0902MW 10 development of this site is therefore viewed as being acceptable and in accordance with the provisions of Policy H6 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy H5 of the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). The proposal is for a high density scheme and therefore accords with the advice contained in Planning Policy Guidance (PPG3) ‘Housing’ and Policy H6 of the emerging Local Plan.

In terms of design and appearance, the proposal falls to be assess against Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policies B16 and B18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE1 of the emerging Local Plan. The application site itself lies outside a Conservation Area, however the boundary to the Star Hill Conservation Area follows the eastern side of Star Hill and adjoins the frontage to the site, while the boundary to the Star Hill to Sun Pier Conservation Area, passes to the north of the site and includes nos. 1-8 Orange Terrace. Consequently all of the buildings within the immediate vicinity of the site lie within a Conservation Area, with the exception of the application building, Rochester Gate and 15 Star Hill. Therefore, although the site is not within a Conservation Area, the development would affect the setting of these areas and therefore falls to be assessed against Policy ENV17 of the Structure Plan, Policy B4 adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE15 of the emerging Local Plan. These Conservation Area policies state that development within, or affecting the setting of Conservation Areas, should achieve a high quality of design which will preserve and enhance the area’s historic or architectural setting and appearance. These policies state, inter alia, that: traditional street patterns, building lines, open spaces and urban spaces, paving and roadway materials, boundary treatments and street furniture should be retained; and the scale height, mass, roofscape, materials, detailing, fenestration, plot width and depth, and visual appearance of new development should be sympathetic with existing buildings and their settings.

The existing building, being a single storey industrial structure makes little or no contribution to the character of the area. The surrounding area comprises a mix of development types with a three storey Edwardian building and a Grade II Listed Georgian terrace to the south, a variety of three storey Georgian and Victorian buildings opposite site, a mid twentieth century public house, and Rochester Gate dating from the 1980’s of a similar bulk and scale to that now proposed. There is therefore no clearly defined architectural character to the area.

Having regard to the mixed character of the area, it is considered that any development on this site needs to make a clearly defined architectural statement in its own right and not mimic any of the neighbouring buildings. Subject to the use of appropriate materials and detailing, it is considered that the proposed building would make a positive statement in the area that would enhance its appearance. The existing street patterns, building lines and spaces would be unaffected by the development. Having regard to the aforementioned Development Plan policies, the proposed development is viewed as being acceptable in terms of design and appearance and its affect on the character of the Conservation Area.

The proposal falls to be assessed against Policy B18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE2 of the emerging Local Plan in terms of its impact on neighbouring properties. The flank wall of the proposed building would lie approximately 11 metres form the flank wall of no. 1 Orange Terrace and would rise to approximately 16 metres above the prevailing road level (compared with 8.3 metres for the existing building and 11 metres for the flank wall of 1 Orange Terrace. There are no windows in the flank wall of number 1 Orange Terrace and the windows in the flank wall of the proposed block facing that property would be obscure glazed bathroom windows. There would, therefore be no un-neighbourly overlooking or overshadowing of the immediately neighbouring house in Orange Terrace.

DC0902MW 11 The rear of Rochester Gate lies between 16 and 19 metres to the north of the side elevation of the proposed building, which would rise to a height of 16 metres (compared to a height of 6.2 metres for the existing building) above the prevailing road level and 21 metres above the ground level at the rear of Rochester Gate. Rochester Gate rises to a height of 14 metres at the rear and has a ridge height of 18 metres. The orientation of the proposed building would result in four storeys of living rooms and bedrooms overlooking six storeys of living accommodation at the rear of Rochester Gate. Kent Design suggests that a distance of 21 metres between unobstructed windows serving habitable rooms in the private rear facades of dwellings is generally acceptable. The design guide further advises that this dimension should not be applied as an absolute and that it may be varied according to the surrounding context. So far as this site is concerned, privacy to the rear of Rochester Gate is already affected by overlooking from the highway. While the proposed development, due to its height, is likely to increase the potential for overlooking, particularly towards the upper flats and the roof gardens, it is considered that this scale of increase is not sufficient to raise an objection to the application on this count. The potential for the proposed building to overshadow the rear of Rochester Gate has been assessed and it has been established that after midday (depending on the time of year) there is some potential shadowing to occur (up to a maximum of 2 hours per day). It is considered that this level of overshadowing is not sufficient to warrant the refusal of planning permission.

It is also important to have regard to the development’s impact on 15 Star Hill. The flank wall of the proposed building would come tight to the boundary with that property and would rise to a height of 14 metres (compared with 5 metres for the existing building and 12 metres for no. 15. There would be a gap of between 5 and 8 metres between the flank walls of these buildings. However, as there would be no windows in the flank wall of the proposed flats, there would be no unneighbourly overlooking and as the proposed building will be to the north, there would be no overshadowing.

It is to be noted that this site adjoins the A2 which is subject to considerable flows of traffic. Accordingly the development is likely to be exposed to road traffic noise and under Policy BNE3 of the emerging Local Plan there is a requirement to ensure that prospective residents do not experience an undue level of such disturbance. In this respect it will be necessary for the developer to undertake a road traffic assessment and incorporate a mitigation scheme in to the finished building. It should be further noted that the majority of Star Hill is in a candidate Air Quality Management Area and that the application site will need to be included in this area if it is redeveloped for residential purposes.

In amenity terms the application is therefore viewed as being acceptable and in accordance with the cited Development Plan policies.

With regard to vehicle parking, the adopted standards, as maxima, require the provision of an average of 1.5 spaces per dwelling across the development. The submitted drawings show a total of 26 spaces which represents a provision of slightly better than one per flat. In assessing this level of provision regard should be paid to: the site’s proximity to the city centre; its closeness to public transport facilities, most particularly the railway station; and the availability of public car parking nearby. Having regard to these factors further on site parking is considered to be unnecessary and contrary to current government advice. The proposal is, therefore, regarded as being acceptable when it is assessed against the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy T12 of the emerging Local Plan. In this respect the proposal is viewed as being in accordance with the objectives of the Medway Local Transport Plan 2000 (paragraphs 1, 2 and 4).

DC0902MW 12 Applying the standard pupil product ratios to this proposal for educational purposes this scheme has been assessed as generating a demand for 12 primary school places, which amounts to a contribution of £72,000 (£6,000 per place). Having regard to the provisions of Policy S9 of the Structure Plan and Policy S6 of the emerging Local Plan, it is considered that a developer contribution should be sought by way of a Section 106 Obligation. The applicants have offered to make a contribution of £60,000 (equivalent to 10 places) and this level of contribution is considered to be acceptable.

The application is recommended for approval subject to the applicant entering into the aforementioned Section 106 Obligation.

DC0902MW 13

3. MC2001/0573

Date Received: 2nd April 2001

Location: Land at 24 and rear of 26 to 38 Higham Road, Cliffe, Rochester, Kent, ME3 7SJ

Proposal: Erection of six detached 4-bedroomed houses with integral garages

Applicant: Constantine Developments Ltd Unit F1 Knights Park Knight Road Strood Kent ME2 2LS

Agent: Mr R A Clayton 32 Watling Street Gillingham Kent ME7 2YH

Ward: Thames Side

Recommendation - Approval Subject to:

A: The applicant entering into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a payment of £12,000 towards the provision of educational facilities: and

B: the following conditions:

(as amended by plans received on 20th September 2001)

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the buildings are occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 The first floor windows on the eastern side elevation to the dwelling on Plot 6 shall be fitted with obscure glass and shall be non-opening apart from any top hung fan light.

5 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows shall be installed in the first floor southern elevation of the dwelling on Plot 1 herein approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

DC0902MW 14

6 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include means of enclosure and other vehicle and pedestrian circulation areas. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with grass and plant establishment, aftercare and maintenance); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; and implementation programme.

7 All hard and soft landscape works 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 or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

8 No development shall take place until a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of five years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

9 In this Condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs a) and b) below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the date of occupation of the building for its permitted use.

a) No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Any pruning approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work).

b) If any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time as may be specified in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

c) The erection of fencing for the protection of any retained tree shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and particulars before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of the development, and shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any area fenced in accordance with this Condition and the ground levels within those areas shall not be altered, nor shall any excavation be made without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

10 The private drive within the site shall be lit in accordance with a lighting scheme to be installed on site before the occupation of any building on site in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

DC0902MW 15 11 No dwelling shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site for 2 cars per dwelling to be parked in accordance with plans hereunder approved by the Local Planning Authority.

12 No dwelling shall be occupied until a means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans.

13 Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed service road and the public highway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details.

14 Vision splays of 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access points and no obstruction of sight more than 0.6 metres above carriageway level shall be permitted within the splays.

15 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking and garaging shall be kept available for such use and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on the land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved parking space.

Site Description

This application relates to an irregular shaped plot of land (known as 24 Higham Road), which has been the subject of two previous applications (ME/98/0559/MR and MC1999/5153), together with a rectangular area of land to the rear of numbers 26 to 38 (even) Higham Road. The former application was refused, but the latter benefits from an outline planning permission for three dwellings and is still extant. The bungalow at 24 Higham Road has now been demolished and the site is vacant. The remaining land was formerly allotment gardens, but is also vacant.

The site has a frontage of approximately 13 metres to Higham Road, between numbers 22 and 26. To the rear the site varies in length between 48 metres and 81 metres and has a depth of approximately 50 metres. At the front of the site there is a Blue Cedar Tree (subject to a Tree Preservation Order) and conifers and hedges enclose the curtilage of the former bungalow.

The surrounding area is predominantly residential with the rear gardens of the Victorian houses in Higham Road bounding the site to the south and the modern houses in New Road bounding the site to the east and north. To the west the site is bounded by farmland.

Proposal

The submitted application is for the construction of an access road leading from Higham Road and six detached houses. The houses would be orientated north/south, with the rear gardens backing onto the rear gardens of the houses in New Road. The access road serving the new houses would be built in front of them, to the rear of the gardens to the existing properties in Higham Road. The westernmost house would project forward of the others in

DC0902MW 16 order to create a feeling of enclosure and to preclude access to the land to the west for further development at some future date.

The submitted drawings show that the trees and hedges surrounding the site would be retained and that additional planting is to be carried out on the boundaries. While the retention of the Blue Cedar Tree has been attempted, in the light of the advice of the Fire Authority it has been considered expedient to remove it and secure the planting of a replacement tree in a more suitable location, which is shown on the submitted drawings.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.36 hectare (0.9 acre) Site density: 16.4 d.p.h. (6.6 d.p.a.)

Relevant Planning History

ME/75/955 Erection of single storey side extension. Approved 22nd December 1975.

ME/81/249 Demolition of existing outbuilding, replacement with new building for use as private motor garage and workshop. Approved 18th May 1981.

ME/98/0559/MR Outline application for the demolition of existing bungalow and erection of six houses with garages. Refused 9th December 1998.

MC1999/5153 Outline application for demolition of bungalow and outbuildings and erection of two detached houses and one detached bungalow with associated garages. Approved 11th August 1999.

Representations

The application has been advertised on site and neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of 11-29 (odd) and 18-22 and 26-38 (even) Higham Road; and 1-13, 21-35 (odd), 1 and 2 Burgh Cottages, Rose Cottage and Wayside New Road.

Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Parish Council has written raising no objection.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written objecting on the grounds of overdevelopment.

8 letters and a petition of 15 signatures has been received objecting on the grounds of: -

- inadequate vehicular access to the site;

- inadequate sight lines;

- loss of on-street parking in Higham Road;

DC0902MW 17 - loss of privacy to the rear of houses in Higham Road and New Road;

- loss of outlook;

- loss of access to the neighbouring property; and

- inadequate local infrastructure provision for example schools and doctor’s surgery.

All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans.

Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Parish Council has written raising no objection to the revised plans.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written re-iterating its previous objections.

Four letters have been received from the occupiers of three properties re-iterating previous concerns regarding loss of privacy and requesting a tree screen along the boundaries to the site and objecting on the additional ground of noise and disturbance from the proposed vehicular access.

The Kent and Medway Towns Fire Authority has written commenting that: the access road should not be less than 3.7 metres wide; the turning circle for a fire appliance is 16.8 metres between kerbs and 19.2 metres between walls and adequate radii within the site should be provided to satisfy these requirements; and an appliance should be able to reach to within 45 metres of any front door within the site.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996:

Policy S9 (Infrastructure and Community Services) Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Parking Standards) Policy RS1 (Rural Development) Policy RS2 (Housing and Development at Rural Settlements)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992:

Policy H9 (Backland/Tandem Development) Policy T13 (Parking Standards) Policy C11 (Trees and Woodland) Policy V1 (Housing Development at Rural Settlements) Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B18 (Design for New Residential Development)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999:

Policy S6 (Planning Obligations) Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE44 (Trees on Development Sites) Policy H12 (Residential Development in Rural Settlements)

DC0902MW 18 Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The site lies within the built confines of Cliffe as identified on the Proposals Map to both the adopted Local plan and the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). The principle of residential development on this site is, therefore acceptable under the terms of Policy V1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy H12 of the emerging Local Plan.

Accordingly the main issues to be considered in relation to the current application are as follows:

- the effect of the proposal on the character of the area. - the design and appearance of the proposed houses. - the effect of the proposal upon the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings. - the adequacy of the parking provision. - the suitability of the access onto Higham Road. - the need for educational contributions. - the impact of the proposed works on the protected tree.

The current application by virtue of the inclusion of the additional land to the west, almost doubles the size of the site that was the subject of the previous applications, enabling six houses to be built with a more spacious layout. The current application therefore overcomes the objections to application ME/98/0559/MR in terms of satisfactorily addressing the concerns relating to over development/cramped development. The density of the current proposal, at approximately 16 dwellings per hectare (7 d.p.a.) is comparable with that of the previously approved development (MC1999/5153) and the surrounding development.

In terms of design and appearance two house types are proposed. One of these designs is for plots 2-6, while the second design specifically relates to plot 1 and this latter unit will be used to enclose the development to the west. The proposal makes its own design statement which, having regard to its location to the rear of existing dwellings and the variety of house types in the vicinity, is acceptable and respects the character of the area. The houses would have private rear gardens varying in depth between 10 and 22 metres. The proposal, therefore satisfies the requirements of Policies B16 and B18 of the adopted Local Plan and BNE1 of the emerging local Plan in this regard.

The impact of the proposal on neighbouring properties needs to be evaluated from each of the three sides of the site that bound existing dwellings. To the north, at their closest the rear elevations to the proposed houses would be 30 metres from the rear of the houses in New Road. To the east, the flank wall of the proposed house on plot 6 would be 17 metres from the rear of 1 New Road at its closest, with this distance increasing to 21 metres. There is existing boundary planting that would serve as visual/privacy screening for plot 6. To the south, with the exception of plot 1 there would be over 30 metres between the front of the proposed houses and the rear elevations to the existing dwellings and existing and proposed planting would provide a screen. The house on plot 1 would be approximately 20 metres from the rear of 38 Higham Road and would have no upper floor windows overlooking that property. The proposed development will not, therefore cause any unneighbourly overlooking, loss of outlook or loss of light and in this regard would comply with Policies H9 and B18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE2 of the emerging Local Plan.

DC0902MW 19 The submitted drawings show the provision of garaging or parking for two cars per dwelling. This level of provision satisfies the requirements of the adopted Vehicle Parking Standards and Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy T12 of the emerging Local Plan. The proposal, as amended, provides an access that is acceptable in highway terms and which addresses the concerns raised by the Fire Authority. Although the revised access arrangements would result in the loss of the protected Blue Cedar Tree, which is regrettable, this is not in itself a sufficient reason to refuse consent. Accordingly, no objection is raised to the loss of this tree, subject to the planting of a suitable replacement in an appropriate location.

With respect to making provision for educational facilities, when the standard pupil product ratios are applied to the three additional units arising form the currently submitted application, a demand for 2 primary school places arises. It should be noted that no contribution was obtained for the three units subject to the extant planning permission MC1999/5153. The contribution for 2 primary school places being £12,000 (£6,000 per place). Having regard to the provisions of Policy S9 of the Structure Plan and Policy S6 of the emerging Local Plan, it is considered that the identified developer contribution should be sought by way of a Section 106 Obligation. The applicant has confirmed its agreement to making this contribution.

The application is recommended for approval subject to the applicant entering into the aforementioned Section 106 Obligation.

DC0902MW 20

4. MC2001/0802

Date Received: 15th May 2001

Location: Land adjacent to Elaine Court, Elaine Avenue, Strood, Rochester, Kent

Proposal: Construction of a two storey block comprising eight 1-bedroomed flats

Applicant: Mr F Kane Fishers Wood Sharnal Street High Halstow Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr J Epps Construction & Technical Services Greenfields 137 View Road Cliffe Woods Rochester Kent ME3 8UH

Ward: Earl

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

(as amended by plan received on 24th October 2001)

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building is occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels of contours; means of enclosure; and hard surfacing materials. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with grass and plant establishment, aftercare and maintenance); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; and implementation programme.

DC0902MW 21 5 All hard and soft landscape works 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 or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

6 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until that part of the service road which provides access to it has been constructed in accordance with the approved details.

7 No part of the development shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site for cars to be parked in accordance with plans hereunder approved by the Local Planning Authority.

8 Vision splays of 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access points and no obstruction of sight more than 0.6 metres above carriageway level shall be permitted within the splays.

9 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking shall be kept available for such use and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on the land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved parking space.

10 The access road and parking area shall be lit in accordance with a scheme of details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted. The approved lighting scheme shall be installed prior to the first occupation of the permitted development and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development.

Site Description

This application relates to an area of vacant land to the rear of the St. Francis of Assisi Church, hall and vicarage in Galahad Avenue. It comprises the site, subject to an extant planning permission (ME/90/0495), together with the means of access thereto from Galahad Avenue and an additional piece of land that did not form part of the site for the earlier application. This additional piece of land was occupied by 16 garages which have now been demolished. The site of 6 of these garages which is in the ownership of the applicant is included within the application site, while the site area for the remaining garages is excluded.

To the north, the site is bounded by the grounds of the church, which lies approximately 4 metres above the ground level for the application site. The southern boundary is marked by a 2.6 metre retaining wall with a drop to a private pedestrian access separating the site from the rear gardens of the houses and the Jubilee public house in Darnley Road. To the east of the access road are the rear gardens of numbers 1 to 20 Elaine Court.

Proposal

The submitted application is for the construction of a two-storey block comprising 8 one bedroom flats on the western side of the site. [It is to be noted that 6 of these flats already benefit from the extant planning permission (ME/95/0502) and that works under that

DC0902MW 22 permission have been commenced]. Parking for 8 cars is shown on the site within part of the former garage compound and on a piece of land adjoining the proposed service road.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.14 hectare (0.35 acre) Site density: 57 uph (23 u.p.a.)

Relevant Planning History

ME/89/936 Outline application for the erection of four town houses Withdrawn

ME/89/1315 Outline application for three 3 bedroom terraced houses and car parking Approved 20th March 1990

ME/90/0945 Erection of six self-contained flats with parking Approved 31st July 1990

ME/95/0502 Variation of condition 01 on planning permission ME/90/0495 to extend the time allowed for commencement of works by a further 5 years Approved 11th January 1996

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of numbers 1 to 20 (consec) Elaine Court; 166 to 184 (even) Darnley Road; and The Vicarage, Galahad Avenue.

The Parish Church of St. Francis of Assisi has written objecting to the application on the grounds of:

- overlooking of the vicarage garden; - a wall or barrier should be provided between the site and the vicarage garden and church hall car park; and - the site is close to the church hall, which could cause considerable noise nuisance to the residents of the proposed flats

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV15 (Built environment) Policy T17 (Parking Standards)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992

Policy H9 (Backland Development) Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B17 (Landscaping Schemes) Policy B18 (Design for New Residential Development) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

DC0902MW 23

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy H5 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy H10 (Backland or Tandem Development) Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The site lies within a predominantly residential area and the principle of a flatted development on the site has been accepted with the grant of the previous planning permissions. The issues so far as the current application for consideration are:

- the design and appearance of the proposed development; - the impact of the two additional units on the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties; and - parking and access;

The proposed development would not be visible from any public highway and in terms of design and appearance would respect the character of the surrounding development. The proposed development leaves adequate space between buildings, would not cause serious disruption to the local community and would not result in the loss of any trees or natural features. The proposal would, therefore comply with Policy B18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy H5 of the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan).

Although the proposal amounts to backland development, there would be no problems with vehicular access to the development site and the 8 units now proposed would be unlikely to generate any more traffic than the previous garage use. Consequently the proposal would not generate any additional noise or disturbance to adjoining occupiers. The application therefore satisfies the provisions of Policy H9 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy H10 of the emerging Local Plan. The previously approved scheme was designed to ensure that there would be no unneighbourly overlooking with two metres high fences along the northern and southern boundaries. Subject to these fences being provided under the current scheme it is considered that the two additional flats now proposed would not cause any unacceptable overlooking and therefore the development would comply with Policy B18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE2 of the emerging Local Plan.

The adopted vehicle parking standards as maxima require the provision of 1 space per dwelling. The proposal makes provision for 8 spaces and this level of provision is viewed as being acceptable. The application therefore accords with the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy T12 of the emerging Local Plan.

The application is recommended for approval.

DC0902MW 24

5. MC2001/0877

Date Received: 11th May 2001

Location: Veetee House, Neptune Close, Frindsbury, Rochester, Kent. ME2 4LT

Proposal: Extension to building to provide warehouse and new goods in/out bay, canopy, relocation of security hut and weighbridge

Applicant: Veetee Rice Limited C/O Cliffe Contractors Limited Cliffe House Anthonys Way Medway City Estate, Rochester Kent ME2 4DY

Agent: Mrs S Woolnough Cliffe Contractors Limited Anthonys Way Frindsbury Rochester Kent ME2 4DY

Ward: Frindsbury Extra & Chattenden

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

(as amended by plan received 24th October 2001)

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 Materials used on the construction of external surfaces of the extension herein approved shall match those used on the existing premises.

3 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include means of enclosure, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; and hard surfacing materials. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with grass and plant establishment, aftercare and maintenance); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; and implementation programme.

4 All hard and soft landscape works 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 or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

5 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking shall be kept available for such use and no permanent development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) or not, shall be carried out on the land so shown or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved parking space.

DC0902MW 25 Site Description

This application relates to the premises of Veetee Rice, a rice milling, processing, packing and storage company which operates from site 1.6 hectare site on the Medway City Estate. This premises was originally established following the grant of a planning permission in 1981 (ME/81/225) and was extended following the granting of planning permission in 1993 (ME/93/0486). The site currently comprises two large buildings used for production/storage purposes, a three-storey office building, 3 seventeen metre high silos, eight 24 metre high silos and sixteen 22 metre high silos. The buildings on site have been constructed from a mixture of brickwork and profiled metal sheeting. The site also comprises a jetty, together with parking for 118 cars and 5 lorries and landscaping. The buildings have a total floorspace of 7,190 square metres consisting of 3,510 square metres of industrial floorspace, 2,675 square metres of storage and 1,005 square metres of office space. 50 industrial and 50 office staff are currently employed at the premises.

The surrounding area is industrial in character with small units to the west (Sextant park) and north (Meridian Park), an office block to the north (waterside Court) and small industrial units to the rear in Sir Thomas Longley Road. The river Medway lies immediately to the east of the application site.

Proposal

The submitted application is for the construction of an additional building to be sited within part of the car parking area, which would effectively link two existing buildings. The proposed extension would have a floorspace of 2,232 square metres comprising 1,116 square metres of industrial floorspace and 1,116 square metres of storage space. The proposed extension would be constructed from a mixture of bricks and profiled metal sheeting to match the existing premises. An additional 5 staff would be employed as a result of the proposal, increasing the total number of employees to 105 (spread over 2 shifts). The vehicle parking spaces that would be lost as a result of the extension would be re-located to a large planted area on the south side of the site, which would be broken up. A total of 88 parking spaces would be available to serve the existing and extended premises. The security hut and weighbridge at the entrance to the site would be re-located to accommodate the proposed extension.

Relevant Planning History

ME/81/225 Proposed new building and external works to serve a rice processing unit (Plot 21). Approved 1st May 1981

ME/83/593 Erection of rice storage silos. Approved 10th October 1983

ME/93/0486 Erection of a warehouse and packing plant building, together with 8 x 24 metre high and 6 x 22 metre high silos. Approved 17th August 1993

DC0902MW 26 ME/97/0384 Proposed front extension and alterations, erection of 3 x 17 metre high silos, installation of new jetty platform and provision of alternative parking spaces. Approved 24th September 1997

ME/98/0261/MR Change of use of existing building on Plot 6 from industrial to warehouse and offices, proposed goods in/out bay (amendment to buildings approved under reference ME/97/0384), amended site access and relocation of existing gas cylinder store and site security hut. Approved 15th July 1998

Representations

Neighbour consultation letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of: 7-17 (consec) Sextant Park; and 3-6 (consec) meridian Park.

Frindsbury Extra Parish Council has written raising no objection.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy S3 (Economic Development) Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Parking Standards)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992

Policy E1 (Employment Areas) Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B20 (New Commercial Development) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy ED1 (Existing Employment Areas) Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The site lies within an established employment area as identified on the Proposals Maps for both the adopted Local Plan and the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). Policy E1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy ED1 of the emerging Local Plan contain a presumption in favour of allowing proposals for Class B1, B2 and B8 developments. In addition Policy B20 of the adopted Local Plan contains a presumption in favour of permitting extensions to industrial premises, unless their scale and design detract from the visual amenities of the area. Similarly Policy BNE1 of the emerging Local Plan states the design of development should be appropriate in relation to the character, appearance and functioning of the built environment.

Having regard to the proximity of the neighbouring commercial premises to the application

DC0902MW 27 site and the scale of the proposed development, it is considered that this proposal will have no adverse impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of these adjoining properties. It is further considered that the design of the proposed extension is in keeping with that of the existing building and the wider character of the surrounding area. Accordingly no objection is raised to the application under the provisions of the aforementioned development Plan policies.

With respect to vehicle parking provision, the revised arrangements proposed under the submitted application are considered to be acceptable given that they meet the operational requirements of the applicant. Accordingly no objection is raised to the application in this respect under the terms of the relevant development Plan policies.

The application is therefore recommended for approval.

DC0902MW 28

6. MC2001/0891

Date Received: 3rd May 2001

Location: Bush House, Ratcliffe Highway, St. Mary Hoo, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8RJ

Proposal: Conversion of detached Summer room/gymnasium to self contained "granny annexe"

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Bush Bush House, Hoppers Farm Barn Street Ratcliffe Highway St Mary Hoo Rochester, Kent

Agent: Ms I Jarrett 38A Cobham Street Gravesend Kent DA11 0SA

Ward: All Saints

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 The annex accommodation hereby approved shall remain as ancillary accommodation to the dwelling known as Bush House as shown on the approved plans and shall not be used, let or sold as a separate hereditament.

3 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the building is occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Site Description

The application site comprises a large detached house flanked by a detached two-storey garage to eastern side and a detached workshop to western boundary. A detached out building has been erected to the rear of the property behind the garage on the eastern boundary of the plot. The rear outbuilding has been designed in a style to match the main house and it possess a gable ended roof design. Internally this outbuilding comprises a kitchen and bathroom, dayroom and fitted gymnasium. Work commenced on construction of this outbuilding that houses a summer room and a gymnasium in June 1999 (two months after occupation of the main house) and as such it constituted “permitted development”. The applicants maintain that to date this structure has been used as a day room with sleeping accommodation provided within the main house for visiting parents.

There is a small group of residential dwellings within close proximity to the site. The surrounding area is rural and mainly comprises farm land.

DC0902MW 29 Proposal

The submitted application proposes the conversion of the rear outbuilding into a granny annex and as a room for recreational use. The applicants advise that their parents currently live abroad and intend to live in the building during their annual three month stay per year. The remainder of the time the building would be used as a recreation room. The structure in itself does not require planning permission if it used on an incidental basis to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse. However the use of this building as a granny annex does require planning permission because it amounts to a fully self-contained dwelling within the confines of an existing house.

Relevant Planning History

ME/91/0091 Outline application for the erection of one dwelling Approved 19th March 1991

ME/91/0091/A Details pursuant to outline permission for the erection of a 5 bedroomed detached house with detached garage Approved 20th December 1993

ME/97/0193 Erection of a detached double garage with storage/games room above in loft space Refused 29th August 1997

ME/98/0592 Erection of a detached double garage with storage/games room above in loft space Approved 29th December 1998

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of Annleigh cottage and Hoppers Cottage Ratcliffe Highway.

St Mary Hoo Parish Council has written objecting to the application for the following reasons:

- The conversion proposal is tantamount to new residential dwelling in the countryside; - The building appears to have been used for living accommodation for a considerable period; and - Loss of privacy.

One letter of representation has been received raising objection to the proposal on the following grounds: -

- loss of privacy to a neighbouring rear garden will arise due to the siting and orientation of the front door serving the building; and - A six-foot fence on the boundary would not reduce the visual impact of the building due to the difference in levels.

DC0902MW 30 Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996:

Policy ENV1 (Protection of the Countryside) Policy RS5 (Development at Hamlets and in the Countryside) Policy T17 (Parking Standards)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992:

Policy C1 (Development in Rural Areas) Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B18 (Design for New Residential Development) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999:

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE26 (Development in the Countryside) Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues arising in the consideration of this proposal are its impact upon: the character of the rural area; and the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

The application site lies within open countryside as defined by the adopted Local Plan and the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). The proposal therefore falls to be assessed against the criteria identified under Policy RS5 of the Structure Plan, Policy C1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BNE26 of the emerging Local Plan which seek to prevent development within the rural area unless a special justification can be made. The effect of the proposal on the character of the rural area also falls to be assessed under Policy ENV1. The original dwelling was granted planning permission in 1991 under reference ME/91/0091 without a restriction on the permitted development rights to build any outbuildings for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse within the curtilage of the property. The outbuilding subject to the current application complies with the permitted development right criteria in terms of its siting and height. Accordingly it is only its occupation as an annex that requires planning permission in this instance. Having regard to the fact that the design, appearance and siting of this building do not fall to be determined under the terms of the submitted application, it is considered that the proposed occupation of this building as an annex will not breach the terms of the aforementioned rural restraint policies so long as that use is ancillary to the main occupation of Bush House and the building is not occupied as a dwellinghouse in its own right. Accordingly any forthcoming planning permission should be the subject of a condition prohibiting the building from being sold or let as a separate hereditament.

The outbuilding is sited at a higher level than the adjoining property to the west (Hoppers Cottage). Having regard to the distance between the outbuilding and the neighbouring property it is considered that with the installation of a 2m high fence on the boundary between Bush House and Hoppers Cottage that the privacy of the latter property would be maintained an acceptable level. Although the outbuilding will be visible from Hoppers Cottage, it will not have an overbearing and thus detrimental impact upon the visual

DC0902MW 31 amenities of the occupiers of that property. Accordingly no objection is raised to the application under the provisions of Policies B16 and B18 of the adopted Local Plan or Policy BNE1 of the emerging Local Plan.

The site is capable of providing adequate parking in accordance with the adopted Vehicle Parking Standards and therefore, the proposal complies with Policy T17 of the Structure Plan 1996, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy T12 of the emerging Local Plan.

The application is accordingly recommended for approval.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under Officers’ delegated powers but has been reported for Members’ determination because of the representations that have been received from the Parish Council.]

DC0902MW 32

7. MC2001/1380

Date Received: 1st August 2001

Location: Land at Tudor Farm, Stoke Road, Upper Stoke, Rochester, Kent

Proposal: Outline application for the construction of one detached house with attached garage

Applicant: Mr D Clarke Liberty's Grain Road Lower Stoke Nr Rochester Kent ME3 9RE

Agent: Mr L R D Simmons 46 Downsview Chatham Kent ME5 0AL

Ward: All Saints

Recommendation - Refusal

1 The proposed development would be outside the confines of any recognised town or rural settlement and would prejudice the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside in conflict with Policies ENV1, RS2 and RS5 of the Kent Structure Plan 1996, Policy C1 of the Medway Towns Local Plan 1992 and Policies H12 and BNE26 of the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999.

Site Description

The application site is an area of land between the existing residential properties 'Tudor Heights' and 1 Tudor Farm Cottages and is currently occupied by two garages and a shed. The site is bounded by: trees to the north; a hedge to the east along the boundary with 1 Tudor Farm Cottages; and a 1.8m high fence to the boundary with 'Tudor Heights' to the west. The immediate area (Tudor Farm) forms a small development of residential properties also consisting of 2 Tudor Farm Cottages, and 'The Lodge'. All of these properties are accessed via a private track leading from Stoke Road. The area is not readily visible to public view.

Proposal

The application seeks outline permission to construct a detached house to be accessed from the same road that serves 'Tudor Heights' and 'Tudor Farm Cottages'. With the exception of means of access, all other matters (external appearance, siting, landscaping and design) are reserved for future consideration. An indicative block plan has been submitted with the application showing the proposed house possessing a foot print of at least twice that for Tudor Farm Cottages and Tudor Heights.

DC0902MW 33 Representations

A site notice has been placed on the site together with a press notice. Letters of notification have also been sent to owners /occupiers of Tudor Heights, 1& 2 Tudor Farm Cottages, Tudor Farm and The Lodge, all at Stoke Road, Stoke.

One letter has been received which while raising no objection to the development, raises concerns about possible construction disturbance.

Dickens Country Protection Society has written raising objections to the application on the grounds that the development is outside the village confines.

Development plan policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996 (KSP 1996)

Policy ENV1 (Countryside) Policy RS1 (Rural Development) Policy RS2 (Housing at Rural Settlements) Policy RS5 (Development in the Countryside)

Medway Towns Local Plan1992 (MTLP 1992)

Policy C1 (Rural Areas) Policy C12 (Agriculture) Policy C13 (Areas of Special Significance for Agriculture) Policy T13 (Car Parking)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE26 (Development in the Countryside) Policy H12 (Residential Development in Rural Settlements) Policy T12 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The site is located within the open countryside and is outside any recognised rural settlement identified in either the adopted Local Plan or the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan). The adopted Local Plan also identifies the site as being within an Area of Special Significance for Agriculture, however this notation has now been dropped for Development Plan purposes as a consequence of recent changes to national farming policy.

Considerations of the countryside landscape and character and the need to protect it for its own sake (Policy ENV1 of the Structure Plan) are the paramount considerations for this proposal in Development Plan policy terms. There is a clear pattern of refusal with consistent support from the Secretary of State to the principle of residential development in the rural area in general.

The applicant’s agent in a supporting statement submitted with the application has

DC0902MW 34 recognised that this form of development in the countryside is controlled by policies of restraint and that it is unacceptable in principle and contrary to Policy RS5 of the Structure Plan, Policy C1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy H12 of the emerging Local Plan. However, the applicant has sought to justify this proposal in terms of Policy RS2 of the Structure Plan on the basis that this policy, in villages and small rural towns, allows for modest infilling. However it is considered that the proposal fails on two counts under Policy RS2. First, the site does not fall within a recognised settlement and it is clear that the houses adjacent to the site form an isolated group of development in the open countryside. Second, the houses adjacent to the site do not form 'a substantial built up frontage' in this area. Two houses with a gap in between do not represent a substantial number of houses fronting the access track. They represent an isolated sporadic form of residential development. It is therefore considered that a new dwelling in this location would prejudice the open character and rural appearance of the surrounding countryside and would not protect the countryside for its own sake.

The propsal is therefore in conflict with Policies ENV1, RS2 and RS5 of the Kent Structure Plan 1996, Policy C1 of the Medway Towns Local Plan 1992 and Policies H12 and BNE26 of the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999.

Notwithstanding this in principle objection to the application it is considered that the site could be developed in a manner that would not detract from the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties, ie the development would not give rise to a loss of privacy or disturbance. No highway objections are raised to the proposal.

The application is recommended for refusal for the reasons stated.

[This application was considered by Members at the Area Development Control Committee (West) on the 11th October 2001 when it was determined to defer a decision to enable a Members’ Site Meeting to be held].

DC0902MW 35

8. MC2001/1475

Date Received: 28th August 2001

Location: 12 Medway Street, Chatham, Kent, ME4 4HA

Proposal: Change of use from retail (Class A1) to hot food takeaway (Class A3)

Applicant: P & S Leisure Ltd 186a High Street Rochester Kent ME1 1EY

Agent: Mr G M Everard Carlton House Hall Road Aylesford Kent ME20 7HR

Ward: Town

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 The development shall not be brought into use until arrangements for the conduction and extraction of fumes have been made in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and such arrangements shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the use.

3 The use hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours of 0800 to 2300 Mondays to Sundays inclusive.

Site Description

The application concerns a vacant shop unit within a single storey parade of similar units within the vicinity of Medway street’s junction with Globe Lane and Sir John Hawkins Way. The other units are occupied as follows: hairdressers (2), financial consultants (4), estate agents (6), computer shop (8), café (10) and furniture shops (14 & 16). Adjoining at the western end of the parade there is a public house. The application property is opposite the rear delivery/service yards serving 125/127 High Street and open car sales sites. To the rear of the parade lies the Globe Lane public car park. There are double yellow line ‘no waiting’ restrictions on both sides of Medway Street outside the premises.

Proposal

The application seeks permission to change the use of the unit to a take away fish and chip shop (Class A3) trading between the hours of 12.00am to 9.00pm Mondays to Saturdays. The business would employ 1 part-time and 3 full-time members of staff and is expected to generate a traffic requirement for one light goods vehicle calling at the premises each day.

The submitted plans show little alteration to the premises and would provide a customer waiting area in front of a serving counter with food cooking and preparation, storage and

DC0902MW 36 washing up areas to the rear. The property possesses a small rear service yard but there is no vehicular access or parking for the site.

Representations

Notification letters have been sent to the occupiers and owners of: numbers 2 to 12 (even) Medway Street; and 125 to 127 High Street, Chatham.

No letters of representation have been received.

Development plan policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy S1 (Sustainability) Policy S8 (Town Centres) Policy NK2 (Medway Towns) Policy ENV16 (Urban Land) Policy T13 (Town Centre Parking)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992

Policy B16 (New Development) Policy R1 (Main Retail Centres) Policy R10 (Food and Drink) Policy T11 (Town Centre Parking) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999

Policy S2 (Strategic Principles) Policy S5 (Chatham “City” Centre) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy R16 (A2 & A3 Uses) Policy T12 (Parking Standards) Policy T13 (Parking Strategy)

Planning Appraisal

The site is located within the recognised town centre for Chatham and the main retail area identified in the adopted 1992 Local Plan. However the Medway Local Plan (deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging 1999 Local Plan) just excludes it from the primary shopping area and designates it within the riverside area identified for the redevelopment of Chatham as the “city” centre of Medway. The relevant policies in both the adopted and emerging Local Plans for the evaluation of changes of use to food and drink premises (Class A3) provide for a favourable consideration in retail centres outside identified primary areas. The application property lies within a secondary retail area. However a grant of permission will also depend upon an evaluation of effects on the interests of the character, amenities and appearance of neighbouring property and the area generally, as well as traffic matters.

The site is set well away from any residential or sensitive development and is in close proximity to another food and drink establishment (at no.10). Accordingly it is considered that

DC0902MW 37 the development would not harm the character or amenities of the locality. With regard to the emerging Local Plan intentions to promote a comprehensive redevelopment of the riverside area, while the application premises are within that area, given the proposal involves the reuse of an existing property with no new building work, it is considered that they would not prejudice these Plan proposals.

The proposal involves the provision of a hot food take way outlet that is likely to attract a significant proportion of customers in motor vehicles. Current parking standards advocate the provision of up to 6 spaces for a hot food takeaway unit and this site has no provision available. However the proposed use would be likely to draw the vast bulk of its custom from patrons who would already be in the town centre for some other purpose (shopping, employment and other visits), although the proposed evening opening hours would be at a time when the bulk of these categories of customers would have left the centre. The site is close to a public car park however in Globe Lane and this is not heavily used in the evening period. Given these circumstances no highway objection is raised to the application.

This application is therefore recommended for approval.

DC0902MW 38

9. MC2001/1483

Date Received: 20th August 2001

Location: 29 Priestfields, Rochester, Kent, ME1 3AB

Proposal: Demolition of existing garage/store and construction of a two storey side extension to form granny annexe

Applicant: Mr M Bowen 29 Priestfields Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr J L Epps Construction & Technical Services Greenfields 137 View Road Cliffe Woods Rochester, Kent ME3 8UH

Ward: St Margarets & Borstal

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 The landing and bathroom windows on the east and west elevations shall be fitted with obscure glass and shall be non-opening apart from any top hung fan light.

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows other than those hereby approved shall be installed in the flank wall(s) of the extension herein approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

5 The annexe hereby approved shall remain for purposes ancillary to the house at 29 Priestfields, Rochester and shall not be used, let or sold as a separate hereditament.

6 No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the extension is occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

DC0902MW 39 Site Description

The application site comprises a two storey semi detached property set within a relatively large plot on the northern side of Priestfields. The property has a gravelled and landscaped front garden with vehicular parking to the side. To the rear and side of the property a detached garage and workshop currently exist. Behind this lies a detached summer house. The property is enclosed by 1.5 to 2metre high boundary treatment to each side. Part of the workshop and garage forms the eastern boundary. The application property is bounded to the west by number 29A which is the other half of this pair of semi-detached houses and by a detached house at number 31.

Proposal

This application proposes the demolition of the garage and workshop to allow for the construction of a part two storey and single storey side and rear extension that would accommodate a garage and a granny annexe. The flank wall to the extension would be set in approximately 1 metre off the boundary with no.31 Priestfields. The annexe would comprise a kitchen, lounge/diner and wc at ground floor level with bathroom and two bedrooms (one to be as a sewing room/occasional guest room). The garage would serve the needs of the main household. The applicants have submitted that the accommodation is required for an elderly relative who wishes to retain some independence but who also requires some essential care when the need arises.

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of the following properties:- 27, 29a, 31, 33, 80 and 82 Priestfields.

One letter of representation has been received raising an objection on the following grounds:-

- potential loss of sunlight caused by the 2 storey element of the extension;

- loss of privacy; and

- the 2 storey extension is too large.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996:

Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Parking)

Medway Towns Local Plan 1992:

Policy B16 (New Development) Policy B19 (Extensions to residential properties) Policy T13 (Parking)

DC0902MW 40 Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999:

Policy BNE1 (Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy T12 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration arising from this proposal are its impact upon: the character and appearance of the surrounding area; the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties; and parking.

This application falls to be assessed against the provisions of Policies ENV15 of the Structure Plan, B16 and B19 of the adopted Local Plan and BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan (Deposit Version) 1999 (the emerging Local Plan) which set out criteria for the assessment of proposals in terms of their impact on the built environment and design quality. It is considered that the proposed extension in terms of its design and scale would not detract from the appearance of either the existing house or the surrounding area and having regard to the degree of boundary separation would allow for a satisfactory break in the streetscene to be maintained.

Policy BNE2 of the emerging Local Plan addresses amenity considerations. In this instance the proposal would involve the removal of the existing boundary treatment. As a consequence of the slightly raised floor level of the extension and the proximity of flank windows to the boundary with number 31, it is considered that in order to safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of the aforementioned property that a new wall or fence should be installed. Accordingly it is recommended that a condition be attached to any forthcoming planning permission requiring the submission of boundary treatment details for approval. It is further recommended that the first floor windows serving a bathroom and landing are obscure glazed and that the introduction of any additional flank windows should be controlled.

With regard to overshadowing, the proposal will result in some additional overshadowing of the rear garden of 31 Priestfields. Having regard to the fact that the 2 storey element will project 3 metres projection from the rear elevation of the original house and to the shadow already cast by the existing structures that are to be demolished and the orientation of the extension, the degree of overshadowing is not considered sufficient to warrant an objection being raised on this count. Additionally due to the limited nature of the 2 storey projection and the distance from the neighbouring boundary, no objection is raised to the scheme in terms of its visual impact upon the occupiers of number 31.

In light of the fact that the extended property will have a minimum of four parking spaces available to it no highway objection is raised to the application.

The application is viewed as being in accordance with the cited Development Plan policies and is recommended for approval.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under officers’ delegated powers but has been reported for Members’ determination at the request of Councillor Baker.]

DC0902MW 41