PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR 28TH APRIL 2004 (WEST)

Page 1 MC2003/1529 Strood Rural Construction of one detached 3-bedroomed bungalow with integral garages and formation of access Land rear of 3 View Road, Cliffe, Rochester, Kent 3

2 MC2003/1929 Peninsula Construction of a two storey guest accommodation block with demolition of existing farm building Cooling Castle Barn, Main Road, Cooling, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8DT 9

3 MC2003/2145 Rochester West Outline application for construction of pair of semi-detached houses Rear of 62 Maidstone Road (fronting Albany Road), Rochester, Kent, ME1 3BS 16

4 MC2003/2667 Peninsula Outline application for the construction of a dwelling house Land adj. to Medtha House, Chapel Road, Isle Of Grain, Rochester, Kent, ME3 0DR 22

5 MC2003/2686 Peninsula Construction of two 4-bedroomed self catering holiday chalets Land at Fenn Croft, Newlands Farm Road, St. Mary Hoo, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8QS 27

6 MC2004/0124 Strood Rural Construction of 5 bedroomed detached house with attached garage Rear of 28 Hollywood Lane, Wainscott, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8AL 33

7 MC2004/0309 Strood Rural Insertion of dormer to rear to facilitate loft conversion 39 Jarrett Avenue, Wainscott, Rochester, Kent, ME2 4NN 38

8 MC2004/0506 Strood South Construction of a two storey rear extension 23 The Shades, Rochester, Kent, ME2 2UD 41

9 MC2004/0686 Strood Rural Outline application for residential development at a density of not less than 30 dwellings to the hectare Land at Toad Hall and The Searchlight, Main Road, Chattenden, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8PR 44

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.

DC0902MW 1

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

DC0902MW 2

1 MC2003/1529

Date Received: 22nd July 2003

Location: Land rear of 3 View Road, Cliffe, Rochester, Kent

Proposal: Construction of one detached 3-bedroomed bungalow with integral garages and formation of access

Applicant: Mr I P Davison 3 View Road Cliffe Woods Rochester Kent ME3 8JQ

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

Ward: Strood Rural

Recommendation - Refusal

(as amended by plan received on 26th March 2004)

1 The proposal represents an undesirable form of backland development that would harm the character and appearance of the area and result in the generation of an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance for the occupiers of adjacent properties as a consequence of vehicular and pedestrian activity associated with the development. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Kent Structure Plan 1996, Policies BNE1, BNE2 and H9 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003.

Site Description

This application relates to part of the rear and side garden area of number 3 View Road, a detached bungalow set within substantial grounds. The grounds of 3 View Road have a depth of approximately 92 metres and a width ranging between 30 metres to the front, narrowing to approximately 22 metres to the rear. The existing bungalow is set approximately 10 metres from the public highway and there is a gap of 9 metres between the eastern flank wall of the bungalow and its eastern/side boundary.

The application site forms part of the rear and side gardens of the application property and the application site comprises two elements. The main part of the site lies to the rear of the existing bungalow and is roughly rectangular in shape having a depth of approximately 46 metres (extending backwards from the rear/northern boundary towards the existing bungalow. The second part of the site comprises a 4.8 metre wide and a 44 metre long strip of land running to the side of the existing bungalow. The garden area of the property is well maintained and there are several trees, including 3 oaks, close to the western boundary, 2 fruit trees and a conifer and a willow within the heart of the application site. There are significant mature tree/shrub screens extending along most of the eastern and rear boundaries of the site.

DC0902MW 3 The application site is bounded: to the west by the rear gardens of properties in Town Road; to the north by the rear gardens of houses in Tennyson Avenue; and to the east by the curtilage of 5 View Road which is currently occupied by a small shack set within very substantial grounds. To the south, on the opposite side of the street there is a detached house at number 4 View Road.

Proposal

The application, as originally submitted, proposed the retention of the existing bungalow and the construction of two, detached, three bedroomed bungalows within the rear garden of the existing bungalow.

The application has subsequently been amended and it now proposes is the construction of one bungalow. The proposed bungalow would be L-shaped and have three bedrooms and an integral garage. The bungalow would be clad in stock facing bricks and concrete interlocking tiles. The bungalow would measure approximately 14 metres in depth and would be 15 metres (maximum) wide. The proposed bungalow would respectively have eaves and ridge heights of 2.5 and 5 metres.

The front wall of the proposed bungalow would be sited approximately 27 metres from the rear of the existing bungalow (3 View Road). The proposed bungalow would have a rear garden of approximately 27 metres, with a side garden of between 7 and 9 metres to the west and a 1.5 metre gap between the flank wall and the eastern boundary. At its closest point the proposed bungalow would be 8 metres from the 3 mature oak trees that are located approximately midway along the western boundary of the site and are to be retained under this scheme.

The proposed bungalow would be accessed via a 3.8 metres wide and 55.5 metre long driveway, with a 0.5 metre wide footway, passing along the eastern side of the existing bungalow. A turning area would be provided in front of the bungalow. The existing bungalow would retain a back garden of almost 24 metres in depth.

It is proposed that a 2.5 metre high brick wall would be installed as a screen between the proposed access road and the existing bungalow at number 3 View Road. It is proposed that the existing fences will remain along the western and northern boundaries of the site. Along the eastern boundary the existing chain link fence and conifers will be removed and replaced by a post and rail fence.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.13 hectare (0.32 acre) Site density: 7.7 d.p.h. (3 d.p.a.)

Relevant Planning History

ME/90/0959 Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of two detached houses with integral garages. Approved 8th January 1991

DC0902MW 4 Representations

The application has been advertised on site and neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of: 1, 2, 4 and 9 View Road; 26 to 36 (even), 36A and 38 Town Road; and 2 to 12 (even) Tennyson Avenue.

In response to the originally submitted application the following representations were received.

Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Parish Council has written objecting to the application on the grounds that this proposal amounts to inappropriate backland development.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written objecting to the application on the following grounds:

- over-development; - the development amounts to an undesirable form of backland development; and - the access arrangements are inadequate.

Six letters (from five households) of representation have been received objecting to the application on the following grounds:

- overlooking/loss of privacy; - noise and disturbance from vehicles using the access at the rear of existing properties; - loss of trees, including oak trees, and wildlife; - the proposal would detract from character of area; - light pollution from street lighting and car headlights; - plans do not accurately show impact on neighbouring properties; - undesirable backland development contrary to Policy H9 of the Medway Local Plan; - piecemeal development; - inadequate private amenity space for the proposed dwellings; - no need for more houses in Cliffe Woods; and - the proposal would increase risk of flooding.

Two letters have been received raising no objection in principle, but raising the following concerns:

- there is inadequate parking to serve the proposed bungalows; - the access in inadequate for emergency vehicles; - query raised re the lighting arrangements for the access; - the potential for tree loss; and - there should be a 3 metre high fence around the perimeter of the site and no windows in the roofs to ensure there is no loss of privacy or noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties.

All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans and 6 letters have received objecting to the revised application for the following reasons:

- backland development; - noise and disturbance;

DC0902MW 5 - loss of privacy and security; - the revised layout allows for an additional dwelling to be provided at a later date; - this development would set a precedent for similar development in the area; and - the loss of trees could result in flooding.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Vehicle Parking) Policy RS1 (Development at Rural Settlements)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy H9 (Backland and Tandem Development) Policy H11 (Residential Development in Rural Settlements) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003

Policy QL1 (Quality and Development of Design) Policy E1 (Protecting Kent’s Countryside) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are: whether the development is acceptable in principle; whether the proposal amounts to an acceptable form of backland development; the design and appearance of the proposal and its affect on the character of the area; amenity considerations; and parking.

The principle of development and countryside issues

The proposal is for minor development on a site that lies within the built confines of the rural settlement of Cliffe Woods and there is therefore no objection to the proposed development under the provisions of the rural restraint contained within the Development Plan, namely Policy RS1 of the Structure Plan and Policy H11 of the adopted Local Plan.

Amenity and Backland Development considerations

In terms of general amenity considerations the submitted application falls to be assessed against the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan). In addition because of the backland nature of the proposed development the submitted application falls to be specifically assessed against the provisions of Policy H9 of the adopted Local Plan. Policy H9 indicates that backland development will only be permitted when it does not constitute piecemeal development and such development:

DC0902MW 6 - will not give rise to unacceptable overlooking of existing dwellings and their gardens; provides acceptable access arrangements; - does not give rise to significantly increased levels of noise or disturbance to adjacent residents from traffic using the access; - retains existing natural features, such as trees, which contribute to the amenity of the area; and - the character and amenity of the area as a whole is maintained.

Given that the proposed development will comprise a bungalow, with no accommodation in the roof space, it is considered that this scheme will not give rise to any unacceptable loss of light or overlooking of neighbouring dwellings and gardens. It is further considered that the proposed access will be capable of accommodating the volume of traffic that will be generated by the development.

However it is considered that this proposal fails the criteria set out in Policy H9 that concern noise generation and disturbance and the character of the surrounding area and given these failings the application also therefore in part breaches the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policies BNE1 and BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

With respect to the generation of noise and disturbance it is considered that the proposed development would unacceptably prejudice the amenities of the occupiers of number 3 View Road because all of the vehicular and pedestrian activity generated by the development would be funnelled along the long driveway passing to the side of the existing frontage property. The application has been amended to reduce the number of units from two to one and to construct a brick wall instead of a fence between the access road and the side garden area to number 3 View Road. Whilst this would result in less disturbance than would have arisen under the provisions of the originally submitted scheme, it is still considered that the proposal would result in an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance to the rear of number 3, having regard to the secluded nature of the area at present.

It is further considered that the proposed development would detract from the character of the site’s surroundings by introducing built development within an area that is generally characterised by generous plots that have secluded back garden areas. The proposed bungalow would be an alien feature within this context and although the amended scheme proposes a reasonable sized private garden area, it would still be relatively modest when compared with the surrounding properties in the immediate vicinity. The rear garden areas of the properties in Town Road are particularly spacious and these together with the application site contribute to the character and quality of the existing residential neighbourhood. The proposed development would therefore appear as an uncharacteristic form of backland development, when compared to its surroundings, and would not respect the character and amenities of the surrounding area. The submitted proposal could also set a precedent for similar inappropriate backland development elsewhere in View Road.

In the light of the foregoing assessment it is considered that the submitted proposals represent an unacceptable form of development. The application is therefore viewed as being contrary to the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policies H9, BNE1 (in part) and BNE2 (in part) of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Design and appearance

In design terms, the proposal is for a standard type bungalow with no outstanding design

DC0902MW 7 features. It is designed to appear unobtrusive and would be hidden behind the existing bungalow and not generally be visible from View Road. In itself the design and appearance of the proposed bungalow is considered to be acceptable and in this context no objection is raised to the application under the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Parking

The adopted vehicle parking standards require the provision of 2 spaces per dwelling as maxima in the rural area. The submitted drawings show the provision of two parking spaces, including one garage space. This level of parking is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy TP19 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Other considerations

The Director of Education and Leisure has advised that due to this size of the proposed development that an educational facilities contribution is not required in this instance.

Conclusion

The proposed development is considered to amount to unacceptable backland development because it would detract from the established character of the surrounding area and the vehicular and pedestrian activity associated with the development would be likely to detract from the amenities of the occupiers of number 3 View Road. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under Officers’ delegated powers but has been reported for Members’ consideration at the request of Councillor Bamber.

The application was considered by Members at the Area Development Control West Committee on the 25th February 2004 when it was determined to defer a decision to enable a Members’ site visit to be held. It was further deferred from consideration on 17th March 2003 at the request of the applicant to allow for the submission of a revised scheme for one bungalow rather than two as originally envisaged.]

DC0902MW 8

2 MC2003/1929

Date Received: 9th September 2003

Location: Cooling Castle Barn, Main Road, Cooling, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8DT

Proposal: Construction of a two storey guest accommodation block with demolition of existing farm building

Applicant: Cooling Castle Barn Limited Cooling Castle Cooling Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr B Kendall B J Kendall & Associates 7 Noke Street Farm Wainscott Rochester Kent ME3 8BJ

Ward: Peninsula

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

(and as amended by revised drawings received on 27th February 2004)

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 including: bricks; tiles; weather boarding; brickwork bonding; pointing and mortar mix: external joinery; rainwater goods; and any means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved 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 accommodation hereby permitted shall only be used in association with the use of Cooling Castle Barn for social functions and marriage ceremonies and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C1 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification).

4 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include hard surfacing materials. The 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.

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. The approved planting stock shall be maintained for a

DC0902MW 9 minimum period of five years following its planting and any of the stock that dies or is destroyed within this period shall be replanted in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6 No development shall take place (except as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written specification and time table which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved specification.

7 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.

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.

Site Description

The application site is known as Cooling Castle Barn and comprises a group of buildings and the surrounding land immediately adjoining Cooling Castle. This application relates specifically to a part of the barn complex that is occupied by an outbuilding, together with the adjoining land immediately to the north of that outbuilding. The outbuilding is a shed like structure constructed in facing bricks with steel cladding and a curved roof. Although within the curtilage of a listed building, this structure has no architectural merit.

Cooling Castle Barn, a sixteenth century barn, with a nineteenth century extension on the north elevation. The barn stands at the southern end of the barn complex and fronts onto Main Road. The building is Grade II Listed and is timber framed with red brick walls and dark weatherboarding. The barn is currently used for social functions including wedding ceremonies in accordance with planning permission ME/95/0557. To the east of the barn there is also a red brick building with ragstone features and a gabled plain tile roof, used as ancillary offices and store in association with the main use of the site. These buildings, together with other buildings that have now been demolished (although their slabs remain) surround a grass courtyard. The barn complex is accessed in the south-western corner, adjacent to the gatehouse to Cooling Castle and the access road passes to the south and east of the buildings and serves two car parking areas to the south and east of the site, with a total of 29 spaces and leads to a shingle area to the north capable of accommodating a further 30 cars. Beyond the access road, the site is bounded on three sides, south, east and north by Cooling Castle’s moat and in the north-eastern and south-eastern corners of the site

DC0902MW 10 are the remains of two towers which form part of the remains of the castle and as such are Scheduled Ancient Monuments.

To the east and south of the barn complex there are some houses fronting main Road.

Proposal

The submitted proposals involve the demolition of the outbuilding that lies to the east of the main barn and the construction of a two storey block which would provide accommodation for guests attending functions at the barn. An application for Listed Building Consent for the demolition of the outbuilding was approved on 4th February 2003 under reference MC2003/2305.

The proposed building would measure approximately 30 metres in length by 6.3 metres in depth and would comprise 14 bedrooms with en-suite facilities. There would be 7 bedrooms on each floor. In addition a laundry and a staff bedroom would respectively be provided on the ground and first floors.

The accommodation block would be constructed in red bricks with Kent peg tiles and feather- edged weatherboarding. The front (west) elevation would incorporate low eaves, with 7 hipped roof dormer windows. The building’s main roof would be half-hipped at each end.

The application has been amended to simply the design of the building and remove a rear balcony.

Relevant Planning History

ME/95/0557 Use of land and barn for social functions including marriage ceremonies. Approved 26th June 1996

ME/96/0090/L4 Application for Listed Building Consent for alterations in connection with use of land and barn for social functions including marriage ceremonies. Approved 26th June 1996

ME/98/0632/MR Erection of a timber framed barn including demolition of existing building. Approved 5th February 1999

ME/98/0633/MR Listed building application for the erection of a timber framed barn including demolition of existing building. Approved 5th February 1999

MC2003/2305 Listed building consent for demolition of existing farm building to facilitate construction of a two storey guest accommodation block Approved 4th February 2004

Representations

The proposal has been advertised on site and in the press as development affecting the setting of a Listed Building. Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of: Cooling Castle, Cades, Dove Cottages, 1 Oast Cottages and The Oast, Main Road, Cooling. Consultations have also been sent to English Heritage, the County Archaeological Officer and to the Dickens Country Protection Society.

DC0902MW 11

Cooling Parish Council has written objecting to the application on the following grounds:

- the site is outside the ‘village envelope’; - proposal would increase noise, particularly at weekends; - site is close to neighbouring properties; and - proposal would set a precedent for further development of ‘accommodation blocks’.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written objecting to the application on the grounds of over-intensification of use of the site and the generation of additional traffic on narrow roads. The society has also enquired as to whether an archaeological survey has been carried out.

One letter has been received objecting on the grounds that:

- the proposal would increase noise levels, which are already unacceptable; and - the Barn is situated in a village and the proposal is unacceptable in a rural environment.

The County Archaeological Officer has written making reference to the fact that the application site lies within the grounds of a Scheduled Ancient Monument and that a condition should therefore be attached to any forthcoming planning permission requiring an archaeological investigation of the site to be undertaken prior to the commencement of the development.

All consultees and objectors have been notified following the receipt of the amended plans and no further representations have been received.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV1 (Countryside) Policy ENV4 (Special Landscape Areas) Policy ENV13 (Rural Lanes) Policy ENV18 (Archaeological Sites) Policy ENV19 (Buildings of Architectural or Historic Importance) Policy TO1 (Tourism) Policy T17 (Parking) Policy RS1 (Development in the Countryside) Policy RS5 (Development in the Countryside)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE16 (Demolition of Listed Buildings) Policy BNE18 (Setting of Listed Buildings) Policy BNE20 (Scheduled Ancient Monuments) Policy BNE21 (Archaeological Sites) Policy BNE25 (Development in the Countryside) Policy BNE26 (Business Development in Rural Settlements)

DC0902MW 12 Policy BNE33 (North Kent Marshes Special Landscape Area) Policy BNE47 (Rural Lanes) Policy ED13 (Hotels) Policy T1 (Impact of Development) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards) Policy CF13 (Tidal Flood Risk Areas)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003

Policy SS7 (Development in the Countryside) Policy E1 (Protecting Kent’s Countryside) Policy E5 (Special Landscape Areas) Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy QL8 (Archaeological Sites) Policy QL9 (Buildings or Architectural or Historic Importance) Policy FP11 (Tourist accommodation) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in respect of this proposal are: whether the development is acceptable in principle; design and appearance matters; the effect on the setting of the Listed Building and Scheduled Ancient Monument; amenity considerations; and highways and parking.

Principle

The site lies in open countryside, outside the built confines of Cooling, and therefore the proposal falls to be assessed under the provisions of Policy RS5 of the Kent Structure Plan 2003, Policy BNE25 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and Policy SS7 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan). Regard should also be paid to Policy BNE26 of the Local Plan, which relates to business development in or on the edge of rural settlements. Polices RS5, BNE25 and Policy SS7 contain a presumption against permitting development in the countryside unless certain specified criteria can be met. Although the proposal does not strictly comply with any of these specified criteria, the proposal would relate to an existing authorised use in the countryside and in this regard needs to be in this location. The proposed development will also assist in ensuring that lawful use of the Cooling Castle Barn continues to be economically viable thus securing the continued occupation of this Listed Building. Furthermore, the submitted proposals relate to the demolition of an existing building and its replacement with a new building within the recognised curtilage of the barn complex. Although outside the village, the site adjoins its boundary and therefore falls to be assessed under Policy BNE26.

In the light of the circumstances outlined above, it is considered that the submitted proposals do not amount to a material departure from the provisions of the aforementioned development plan policies. Accordingly no objection is raised to the principle of the submitted application.

Design and Listed Building Considerations

The general form and massing of the proposed building, in its amended form, are considered to be acceptable and in particular the low eaves of the front elevation mirror those of the

DC0902MW 13 adjacent barn. The proposed materials, red brickwork, Kent peg tiles and feather edged weatherboarding will relate well with the surrounding buildings. The general form of the roof is good, with a suitably steep pitch. The dormers have been amended to improve their appearance in relation to the bulk of the windows; front doors have been added to enhance the appearance of the principal elevation and the rear elevation has been improved and simplified with the removal of a proposed balcony, that would have been unsightly, and the provision of a simple rear elevation that would be in character with its rural surroundings.

It is therefore considered that the design and appearance of the proposed building is acceptable in its own right and will respect the character and setting of the adjacent Listed barn. The application accordingly accords with the provisions of Policies ENV1, ENV15, ENV19 and RS1 of the Structure Plan, Policies BNE1, BNE16 and BNE18 of the adopted Local Plan and Policies QL1 and QL9 of the emerging Structure Plan which seek to ensure that the design of new development is of a high standard and that new development does not have a detrimental affect upon the character or setting of Listed Buildings. It is further considered that this development will not adversely affect the setting of the adjoining Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Amenity Considerations

The nearest residential property to the application site is The Oast, which lies approximately 45 metres to the south-east of the site. Due to the local topography of the land that forms the curtilage of the application site, the proposed building would hardly be visible from the Oast or from any other dwellings in the locality. The proposed building will not therefore impact upon the amenities of the occupiers in terms of loss of light, loss of outlook or loss of privacy. The removal of the balcony from the rear elevation has removed the potential for overlooking to the rear of the proposed building towards the houses to the east.

A concern has been raised in terms of noise and disturbance, although this relates to the existing use of the premises. In this context it should be noted that the Council’s Environmental Protection Team has no record of any noise complaints arising from the use of the barn as a venue for functions. It is considered that the proposed development will not generate any significant additional noise or disturbance for the occupiers of neighbouring properties, because the provision of this accommodation will encourage guests to stay overnight thus in practice reducing the number of vehicular movements to and from the site in the evening and late night periods.

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in amenity terms and no objection is therefore raised to the application under the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Highways/parking

There are 29 parking spaces to the north of proposed building and in front of the barn. In addition there are a further 30 spaces, capable of serving both the proposed guest accommodation and the barn, in an overflow car park to the north of the barn complex. To comply with the adopted vehicle parking standards, the proposed guest accommodation requires the provision of a maximum of 14 spaces. No additional parking is proposed as a result of the application, but as there is adequate existing on-site parking to serve the existing use of the site and the proposed accommodation, which will have a use that is ancillary to the principal existing use of the barn and which in itself is unlikely to generate an additional demand for parking, no objection is raised to the application under the provisions of Policy

DC0902MW 14 T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy TP19 of the emerging Structure Plan.

In terms of traffic generation, it is considered that the proposed development is unlikely to generate additional traffic and would have the benefit of reducing the number of late night movements. No objection is, therefore raised to the application under Policy T1 of the adopted Local Plan.

Archaeology

The proposed building would be adjacent to the curtain wall of a medieval castle, which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The works associated with the proposed development may disturb archaeological remains within the site and a condition is therefore recommended requiring an archaeological investigation to be undertaken in accordance with Policy ENV18 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE21 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL8 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Conclusion

The application is considered to be acceptable in all regards and is accordingly recommended for approval. It is recommended that a condition is imposed on any forthcoming planning permission to ensure that the proposed guest accommodation can only be occupied as ancillary accommodation associated with the use of Cooling Castle Barn as a function venue and to thus avoid it being used as a hotel in its own right.

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

DC0902MW 15

3 MC2003/2145

Date Received: 9th October 2003

Location: Rear of 62 Maidstone Road (fronting Albany Road), Rochester, Kent, ME1 3BS

Proposal: Outline application for construction of pair of semi-detached houses

Applicant: Mr R Kundu C/o Agent

Agent: Mr Bunce Prime Folio Ltd 24 Ashford Road Maidstone Kent ME14 5BH

Ward: Rochester West

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

(as amended by plans received on 12th February 2004)

1 Approval of the details of 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 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 development within Classes A, B, C, D and E of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the Order shall be carried out on the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

5 The plans and particulars submitted in accordance with Condition 1 above shall include:

a) A plan showing the location of and allocating a reference number to each existing tree on site which has a stem with a diameter, measured over the bark at a point 1.5 metres above ground level, exceeding 75mm, showing which trees are to be retained and the crown spread of each retained and the crown spread of each retained tree;

DC0902MW 16 b) details of the species, diameter (measured in accordance with paragraph a) above, and the approximate height and an assessment of the general state of health and stability, of each retained tree and of each tree which is on land adjacent to the site and to which paragraphs c) and d) below apply;

c) details of any proposed topping or lopping of any retained tree, or of any tree on land adjacent to the site;

d) details of any proposed alterations in existing ground levels and of the position of any proposed excavation within the crown spread of any retained tree or of any tree on land adjacent to the site within a distance of 6 metres from any retained tree, or any tree on land adjacent to the site, equivalent to half the height of that tree;

e) details of the specification and position of fencing and of any other measures to be taken for the protection of any retained tree from damage before or during the course of development.

In this Condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with paragraph a) above.

6 The 'no build' zone for the mature horse chestnut tree facing onto Albany Road is 6 metres from the centre of the tree. Should the tree be retained the base layer for the drive should be constructed prior to any other work commencing on site and no changes of level shall take place within the no build zone for the horse chestnut tree referred to in this condition.

7 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 the existing and proposed ground levels; 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.

8 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. The approved planting stock shall be maintained for a minimum period of five years following its planting and any of the stock that dies or is destroyed within this period shall be replanted in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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 and turning space.

DC0902MW 17 10 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.

11 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 houses are occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

12 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.

Site Description

The application site fronts onto Albany Road, which is an unmade private street. The site was formerly occupied by a large pitched roof garage and a carport, however the garage has been demolished.

The application site comprises part of the rear garden of 62 Maidstone Road, which has been converted into flats. A recently constructed detached house and a pair of semi-detached houses immediately adjoin the application site respectively to its north and south respectively at numbers 24 and 20/21 Albany Road. The properties on the opposite side of Albany Road comprise a uniform row of Edwardian semi detached houses.

The surrounding area is residential in character.

Proposal

The submitted application proposes the demolition of the existing carport the construction of a pair of semi-detached houses. The application has been submitted in outline form with matters relating to siting, design, external appearance and means of access being submitted for consideration at this time. The only standard outline matter that has been reserved for future consideration is landscaping.

The proposed houses would be 2 bedroomed units. Although the houses would be 2 storeys in height, the roof to the front would be of a cat slide form rising from an eaves line just above the ground floor windows and doors up to a 7 metre high ridge, with the first floor accommodation to the front of the houses being accommodated within a projecting gable element. The main roof is therefore of an asymmetric profile with the rear elevation being of a “normal” two storey appearance. The design also includes the use of quoins as edging features and the use of stone lintels.

The proposed houses at their closest point to Albany Road would be set back 2.5 metres with an area of landscaping in the frontage areas. Each house would have a 5 metre deep back garden.

Immediately on the western side of the proposed houses a vehicular access serving both number 62 Maidstone Road and the proposed houses would be provided. Immediately to the

DC0902MW 18 west of the access 3 nose to tail parking spaces would be provided to serve the new houses.

Relevant Planning History

MC2002/2053 Erection of three storey block of flats to provide for five 1 bed flats Withdrawn

MC2003/0943 Outline application for a pair of semi-detached houses Refused 18 June 2003

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of: 1a-d (inc), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 20, 21 and 24 Albany Road; 56, 56a, 58, 58a, 60, 62, 64 Maidstone Road, Rochester; and the Rochester Bridge Trust.

Six letters of representation have been received objecting to the application as follows:

- The additional traffic and parking requirements generated by the proposal will add to existing levels of traffic and parking conflict in Albany Road; - The development will result in loss of light and privacy for the occupiers of properties overlooking and abutting the site in Albany Road and Maidstone Road; - The scheme may result in the loss of the chestnut tree at the corner of the access road serving the development; - The construction works will generate noise, disturbance and traffic; and - The development will be out of keeping with the character of the road.

Planning Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

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

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy H4 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy T1 (Highway Impact of Development) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003.

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy TP19 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are: whether the development is acceptable in principle; design and appearance matters; amenity implications; and parking and highway matters.

DC0902MW 19

Matters of Principle

The application site lies within the urban area and the area is characterised by residential development. Accordingly the principle of infill residential development is this location is acceptable in Development Plan and national planning policy guidance terms. In this respect the application is viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy H4 of the adopted Local Plan.

Design and Siting Considerations

An application for a pair of semi detached houses on this site was recently refused under application MC2003/0943 on the grounds that the proposed development would have been unduly prominent, being in advance of the existing development on the adjoining sites to the detriment of the streetscene. In assessing the current application it is necessary to establish whether or not the currently submitted application has addressed the concerns identified with refusal of the earlier application.

The previous application showed the proposed houses being sited 1.48 metres back from the road edge and as no design details were submitted with the application it was assumed that the design of the houses would be of a ‘conventional’ two storey format. These details were considered to be unacceptable, taking into account the design and siting of houses at 20, 21 and 24 Albany Road.

The currently submitted plans show that the proposed houses would be setback approximately 2.5 metres from the back edge of the road. The front elevation of the houses, with the use of low eaves and a projecting gable feature, will appear as an interesting design within the streetscape, that would not be unduly bulky given the limited distance from the road edge. Although the proposed development will still extend in advance of immediately neighbouring development, this forward projection only relates to the gable feature and it is considered that the proposed development will not appear as being unduly prominent within the streetscene.

The design and siting of the proposed houses is considered to be acceptable and accordingly no objection is raised to these aspects under the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan).

Amenity Considerations

The flank to flank distances between the proposed houses and the existing properties at numbers 21 and 24 Albany Road is such that the proposed development will not give rise to any significant implications for the amenities of the occupiers of the existing properties. Number 24 Albany Road does have a flank first floor window whose outlook will be affected. However this window serves a bedroom that has another window, facing towards Albany Road, providing an alternative means of light and outlook. The privacy and block spacing distances in relation to 62 Maidstone Road are similar to those for the other recently constructed houses fronting Albany Road and at 20 metres or so the back to back distances for the existing and proposed properties are considered to be acceptable in this context.

Although the amenity areas serving the proposed development will be small, it considered that in the context of current standards and the development that has previously been

DC0902MW 20 approved in Albany Road, that this provision is acceptable. However in order to ensure that control over future development on these restricted sites is retained, it is considered appropriate to withdraw ‘permitted development’ rights both to extend the houses and to construct outbuildings.

With respect to vehicular activity it is considered that the proposed development will not generate levels of activity that would be prejudicial to the amenities of the occupiers of either numbers 24 Albany Road or 62 Maidstone Road, having regard to the parking and access arrangements that have been approved for the conversion of 62 Maidstone Road into flats. It is further considered that the use of the access and parking area by the occupiers of the flat conversion at 62 Maidstone Road will not adversely affect the amenities of prospective occupiers of the proposed houses.

The amenity implications of the proposed development are considered to be acceptable and the application is therefore viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Highway and Parking Considerations

Three parking spaces are shown provided, in a nose to tail layout, adjoining the access road serving the car park intended for use by the occupiers of 62 Maidstone Road. Given the width of the average car and the width of the access at 4.55 metres this arrangement is considered to be acceptable, especially having regard to the availability of manoeuvring space within the car park to the rear of number 62.

The proposed level of car parking conforms with the requirements of the adopted vehicle parking standards and no objection is therefore raised to the application under the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy TP19 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Impact on Horse Chestnut Tree

There is a mature tree at the front of the site, adjoining its boundary with 24 Albany Road that makes a significant contribution to the street scene. Representations have been received raising a concern that the development could adversely affect this tree. The Council’s arboricultural officer has inspected this tree and advised that it is not worthy of being made the subject of a Tree Preservation Order because there is a large cavity in the main stem that is decaying. However the tree could be retained subject to no level changes being made within its crown spread that might affect its root stability. The applicants have confirmed that they wish to retain the tree and that they will avoid any level changes that might affect its stability.

Conclusion

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in design, siting and amenity terms and 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’ consideration because of the number of representations that have been received.]

DC0902MW 21

4 MC2003/2667

Date Received: 22nd December 2003

Location: Land adj. to Medtha House, Chapel Road, Isle Of Grain, Rochester, Kent, ME3 0DR

Proposal: Outline application for the construction of a dwelling house

Applicant: Mr J Dallas Whitehouse Barn Chapel Road Isle Of Grain Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr J Liddiard 14 Wentworth Drive Cliffe Woods Rochester Kent ME3 8UL

Ward: Peninsula

Recommendation - Approval with Conditions

(as amended by plan received on 20th January 2004)

1 Approval of the details of siting, design and external appearance of the building, the means of access thereto 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 dwelling is occupied and shall thereafter be maintained for the duration of the development. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

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.

DC0902MW 22

6 The plans and particulars submitted in accordance with Condition 1 above shall include:

a) A plan showing the location of and allocating a reference number to each existing tree on site which has a stem with a diameter, measured over the bark at a point 1.5 metres above ground level, exceeding 75mm, showing which trees are to be retained and the crown spread of each retained and the crown spread of each retained tree;

b) details of the species, diameter (measured in accordance with paragraph a) above, and the approximate height and an assessment of the general state of health and stability, of each retained tree and of each tree which is on land adjacent to the site and to which paragraphs c) and d) below apply;

c) details of any proposed topping or lopping of any retained tree, or of any tree on land adjacent to the site;

d) details of any proposed alterations in existing ground levels and of the position of any proposed excavation within the crown spread of any retained tree or of any tree on land adjacent to the site within a distance of 6 metres from any retained tree, or any tree on land adjacent to the site, equivalent to half the height of that tree;

e) details of the specification and position of fencing and of any other measures to be taken for the protection of any retained tree from damage before or during the course of development.

In this Condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with paragraph a) above.

7 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.

8 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.

Site Description

The application site comprises a parcel of overgrown land to the side and rear of a 2-storey house known as Wyndrush and a block of 4 flats at Medtha House in Port Victoria Road. Although the origins of the site are not clear and it has had no planning history it appears from the history relating to Wyndrush (which was approved in 1998) that the application site was formerly within the curtilage of Medtha House.

DC0902MW 23 The application site, which is on an irregular shape, has a frontage to Chapel Road and has a maximum width of 31 metres and a depth varying between 11 and 17 metres.

Proposal

The application has been submitted in outline and as originally submitted proposed the construction of a pair of semi-detached dwellings. However the application has subsequently been amended and now proposes the construction of one detached house with two parking spaces. All matters (siting, design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping) have been reserved for future consideration. However an illustrative plan has been submitted with the application which shows the proposed house sited on a building alignment parallel and between 1 and 1.5m back from the edge of the road, with distances ranging between 5 to 9 metres from the party boundary with Medtha House. The parking spaces are shown sited in the north west corner of the plot adjacent to the boundaries with Medtha House and Wyndrush.

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.04 ha (0.1 acres) Site density: 25 dph (10 dpa)

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the occupiers and owners of: Medtha House, 1 to 3 Coastguard Cottages, 1, 3, 5 and Wyndrush, Port Victoria Road; and 2, 4 and 6 Seaview.

Grain Parish Council wrote objecting to the originally submitted application on grounds of over-development and poor access. The Parish Council also wrote requesting the case officer to undertake a site meeting with representatives of the Parish Council. [The requested meeting has been held.] Following the proposal being amended to one house, the Parish Council has written maintaining its objections to the development.

Two letters have been received in respect of the originally submitted proposals objecting to the application on the grounds of:

- overlooking; - loss of outlook; - the development would be out of character with the area; - Chapel Road has insufficient capacity to accommodate the development; and - disturbance from construction work.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

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

DC0902MW 24 Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy H4 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Plan) 2003

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy TP19 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are: whether the development is acceptable in principle; amenity implications; design and appearance matters; and parking and highway matters.

Matters of Principle

The application site lies within the recognised settlement boundary for Grain in the adopted Local Plan and is within an exclusively residential area. Accordingly the principle of infill residential development is this location is considered to be acceptable in Development Plan and national planning policy guidance terms. In this respect the application is viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy H4 of the adopted Local Plan.

Amenity Considerations

The original scheme for two houses; shown on the initially submitted indicative block plan, was considered to represent a cramped form of development for this site, which would have had an unacceptable affect on conditions of light, outlook and privacy for the occupiers of Medtha House, with a building to building separation of only 4.5 metres.

Following the application’s amendment to one dwelling, a revised indicative plan has been submitted. The revised illustrative plan indicates that the proposed house would be sited 10 metres from Medtha House with a similar separation distance of 10 metres from the front of the proposed house to the party boundary with Wyndrush. It is considered that this building separation will result in the proposed house not giving rise to adverse amenity implications for the occupiers of the neighbouring properties, subject to the sensitive positioning of windows and the provision of suitable boundary screening. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in amenity terms and thus in accordance with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan).

Design and Siting Considerations

The siting of the proposed house will mean that it will be a prominent feature within the street scene. However development in the village at this point is of a very informal and irregular pattern and it is therefore considered that a house in this position will not be harmful to the character, appearance and amenity of the locality, so long as an

DC0902MW 25 appropriate boundary treatment or landscaping is provided. The development would represent a density of development at 20 dwellings per hectare which is not high in terms of the national planning policy guidance expectations set out in PPG3 and the house would be provided with an adequate area of amenity space.

Although no design details have been submitted with the application it is considered that with careful attention to detail this site can be developed in a manner that will result in a development that respects the existing character of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in siting and design terms and is therefore viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Parking and Highway Matters

With respect to the provision of on-site parking, the provision of 2 parking spaces would satisfy the requirements of the adopted parking standards. The envisaged parking arrangements are considered to be acceptable and accord with the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy TP19 of the emerging Structure Plan. The limitations of Chapel Road are recognised but it should be borne in mind that it serves a relatively limited number of properties. In this context the proposed house will generate a low level of additional traffic and it is considered that the local highway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this additional traffic without any prejudice to highway safety being caused. No highway objections are therefore raised to the application.

Conclusion

The amended application is considered to be acceptable in all regards and is accordingly recommended for approval.

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

DC0902MW 26

5 MC2003/2686

Date Received: 22nd December 2003

Location: Land at Fenn Croft, Newlands Farm Road, St. Mary Hoo, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8QS

Proposal: Construction of two 4-bedroomed self catering holiday chalets

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Symonds Fenn Croft Newlands Farm Road St. Mary Hoo Rochester Kent ME3 8QS

Agent: Mr P Ritson 57 Harrison Drive High Halstow Rochester Kent ME3 8TF

Ward: Peninsula

Recommendation - Refusal

(as amplified by letters dated 26th January and 18th February 2004.)

1. The applicant has failed to make a sufficiently compelling case to demonstrate that the demand for the proposed accommodation can only be met by undertaking new development at this site, thereby setting aside the normal presumption against permitting new development in the countryside. It is therefore considered that the proposal, due to its size and siting, would result in an unacceptable increase in built mass that would be detrimental to the rural character of the area and also the setting and character of the North Kent Marshes Special Landscape Area. The submitted application is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policies RS1, RS5, ENV4, ENV15 and T01 of the Kent Structure Plan 1996; Policies BNE25, BNE33 and ED15 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and Policies SS7, E1, E5 and FP9 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003.

Site Description

The application site forms part of the curtilage of a Fenn Croft, a large house bounded to the south and west by agricultural buildings. To the west of the Fenn Croft complex there is a single storey purpose built block that is occupied by four holiday let chalets. Fenn Croft is bounded by farmland on all sides.

Access to Fenn Croft is gained by a narrow track, Newlands Farm Road, which also serves a few other isolated houses that are sited to the south east of the application property.

Proposal

The submitted application seeks consent for the construction of a detached building, sited to the west of the existing holiday chalet block, that would accommodate two further self catering holiday chalets. The proposed chalets would be 4 bedroomed units comprising a sitting/dining area, kitchen, 2 bedrooms and a toilet at ground floor level and two bedrooms each with en-suite facilities at first floor level.

DC0902MW 27

The proposed building would measures 10.6 metres in depth and would be 16.3 metres wide. The building would have an eaves height of 2.4 metres and a ridge height of 6 metres. The first floor accommodation would be housed within the roof space and would be illuminated by front and rear dormer windows and rooflights. The proposed building would be clad in weatherboarding and brickwork, while the roof would be covered with artificial slates.

The existing parking area to serving the existing holiday accommodation would be extended to provide a total of 10 parking spaces. This parking area would be enclosed by a low-level holly/hawthorn hedge.

The applicants have submitted supporting information, which in summary is as follows:

- In design and siting terms the development will have a vernacular that is appropriate to this rural location. - The siting of the building has been chosen to create the impression of an enclosed farmyard complex. - The proposal satisfies the requirements of the countryside protection and tourism policies contained within the Kent Structure Plan and the Medway Local Plan. - There is a demand for good quality self-catering tourist accommodation at this site.

Correspondence addressed to the applicant’s agent from the Council’s Principal Tourist Development Officer has also been submitted in support of the application commenting as follows:

- The existing holiday let units at Fenn Croft provide a high standard of accommodation and there are approximately 9 other self-catering holiday let units in Medway, some of which are not graded. There is therefore a shortage of such accommodation in Medway with the result that potential tourist income is not being generated in the area. - Demand has been identified for larger more flexible accommodation that would be met by the proposals at Fenn Croft. - The site is well located to meet demand from cyclists, walkers and bird watchers and there is virtually no similar accommodation on the Hoo Peninsula to meet the needs of these groups. - It is concluded that the provision of the proposed chalets would assist in developing this site as a tourism asset in Medway.

[In making these comments the Tourist Development Officer has made it clear that he is writing in terms of tourism demand and supply and with no regard to land use planning considerations.]

Relevant Planning History

MC2000/0636 Erection of 4 self-catering chalets Approved 12 July 2000

MC2003/0037 Erection of 2no: 4 bedroom self catering chalets Withdrawn 2nd July 2003

Representations

This application has been advertised by means of a site notice and neighbour notification

DC0902MW 28 letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of Newlands Farm and Iden Cottage, Newlands Farm Road. The Farm Office, St Marys Hall and the Dickens Country Protection Society.

St Mary Hoo Parish Council has written raising the following objections to the application:

- approval for this proposal could establish a precedent for similar applications that would harm the rural character of the area; - tourist accommodation is not in keeping with the agricultural character of the area and the previously approved accommodation on this site has spoilt the skyline and eroded the character of the countryside, further accommodation would only serve to make matters worse; - there is no demand for such accommodation in the area and any demand that does exist can be met at the Allhallows caravan site, in existing accommodation in the rural area or in the urban area; - should the holiday letting business fail the buildings will still remain putting a pressure on them to be used for a purpose that might not have been permitted in the first place; - the size of the units is excessive for holiday accommodation; and - the track serving the site is not capable of safely accommodating the additional traffic that would be generated by the development.

Dickens Protection Society has written raising the following objections to the application:

- the development will have an impact on the open countryside and it is questionable whether there is a need for so many bedrooms; and - if the development is permitted conditions should be imposed limiting the use of the accommodation for tourism purposes only.

One letter has been received objecting to the application on the grounds that the additional accommodation would generate unacceptable additional levels of traffic, noise and general disturbance and present highway dangers for users of Newlands Farm Road.

Tourism South East has written making the following comments:

- the proposal represents a high quality scheme that is appropriate for this site; - studies indicate that there is a demonstrable need for good quality self catering units in Kent with occupancy rates well in excess of national averages; - self-catering accommodation normally encourages far longer stays than for example B&B accommodation with greater benefits for the local economy; - self catering accommodation because of its flexibility, freedom and privacy means that its caters for a wide range of visitors. It is also popular with high spending overseas visitors with the potential for Internet booking; - as holiday patterns change self catering accommodation has become an increasingly popular holiday choice and it is important both to the local and wider economy that this demand is met; and - the proposed development would represent a tourism asset to the locality.

DC0902MW 29 Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy TO1 (New Tourist Facilities) Policy RS1 (Development in the Rural Area) Policy RS5 (Development in the Rural Area) Policy ENV4 (Preservation of Special Landscape Areas) Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE25 (Development in the Countryside) Policy BNE28 (Farm Diversification) Policy BNE34 (North Kent Marches Special Landscape Area) Policy ED15 (Self Catering Accommodation) Policy ED16 (Tourist Facilities for Walkers and Cyclists) Policy S4 (Landscape and Urban Design) Policy T1 (Traffic Impact of Development) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2003

Policy SS7 (Development in the Countryside) Policy E1 (Protecting Rural Kent) Policy E5 (Special Landscape Areas) Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy FP7 (Farm Diversification) Policy FP9 (Sustainable Tourist Development) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in respect of this proposal are: whether the development is acceptable in principle having regard to the application site’s location within the rural area; design and appearance matters; amenity implications; and highways and parking.

Background

The applicants do not currently farm the land in their ownership and although there are agricultural buildings forming part of the Fenn Croft complex that are used to store machinery required as part of the maintenance requirements for the land. The condition of these buildings appears to preclude their use for anything other than agricultural or general storage uses.

Both the Council’s own tourism development officer and Tourism South East are supportive of the proposal that they see as filling a market niche currently under represented in Medway. Furthermore policies contained within the approved Structure Plan, the adopted Local Plan and the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure

DC0902MW 30 Plan) give encouragement to the provision of self catering tourist accommodation, such as that being proposed, principally for economic development reasons.

There is also existing tourist accommodation at Fenn Croft, which could be viewed as confirming the existence of this complex as a centre for tourist related development, which is close to a number of recognised tourist attractions in the locality for cyclists, walkers and bird watchers.

Countryside Protection Considerations

Given the diminishing role of agriculture in supporting the rural economy it is recognised that the diversification in the rural economy can add to and continue to support rural communities. However this needs to be carried out in a manner that ensures that the rural character of the rural area is not adversely affected. The application site lies outside any defined settlement boundary and is within open countryside for land use planning purposes. Accordingly a number of Development Plan rural restraint policies apply to the area and are applicable to the proposals the subject of this application. Policy RS5 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE25 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy SS7 of the emerging Structure Plan set out the types of development that can be treated as exceptions to the normal presumption against permitting development within the rural area.

One of the key elements of the aforementioned rural restraint policies is that development in the countryside will only be permitted if it involves the reuse or adaptation of existing buildings that are and would continue to be in keeping with it surroundings. These policies indicate that there will generally only be policy support for new building in the countryside when such development demands a rural location and such development will normally only be in support of agricultural, forestry or mineral extraction activities.

As the proposal involves the construction of a new building, it is clearly in conflict with the provisions of the rural restraint policies and the consideration of this application therefore turns on whether there is a sufficiently overriding case in favour of the proposal to justify setting aside what amounts to a fundamental policy objection to the development.

As has been outlined above in the background section to this officer “Planning Appraisal” there is Development Plan policy support for the provision of additional tourist accommodation within the Local Plan area. However this should not be taken to mean that this represents an overriding consideration in its own right and proposals will continue to need to be assessed on a case by case basis to ensure that they are only permitted where it is appropriate to do so. The applicant’s principal justifications for this development are that: demand exists for the accommodation; there is already similar accommodation at Fenn Croft; the proposal enjoys policy support contained with the Development Plan; and the development will bring environmental improvements. Additionally it is submitted that the application site is well located in relation to nearby rural tourist attractions and historic Rochester. However there are villages that could accommodate new buildings of the nature proposed under the current application and/or other existing buildings in the countryside that could be converted to provide tourist accommodation, that are equally well located. If the options of new building within an existing settlement or the conversion of an existing building were followed then the proposed accommodation could be provided without new build development encroaching into the open countryside. In these circumstances, given the strong presumption against new development in the countryside, it is not considered that the applicants have made a sufficiently overriding case to demonstrate that this is the only site where such development could take place.

DC0902MW 31

As the proposal is considered to be unacceptable in principle, the proposed building, due to its size and siting, would result in an unjustified increase in built mass that would be detrimental to the rural character of the area and also the setting and character of the North Kent Marshes Special Landscape Area within which the application site is located.

The proposal is therefore considered to be conflict with Policies RS1, RS5, ENV4, ENV15 and T01 of the Structure Plan, Policies BNE25, BNE33 and ED15 of the adopted Local Plan and Policies SS7, E1, E5 and FP9 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Detailed Design Considerations

Although the proposed development is considered to be unacceptable as a matter of principle, given the rural location of the site and the design of the adjacent existing block of self-catering chalets it is considered that in design terms the proposed building is acceptable. Accordingly in design and appearance terms no objection is raised to the application under the provisions of Policy RS1 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Highway and Parking Considerations

Access to the site is gained via Newlands Farm Road, a narrow track, that also serves a few other isolated houses before eventually connecting with Fenn Street to the southeast. The proposed development will generate a relatively low level of traffic and it is considered that the local highway network, including Newlands Farm Road, has sufficient capacity to safely accommodate the likely level of additional traffic generation.

There is sufficient space on site to cater for any additional parking resulting from the proposal.

No highway or parking objections are therefore raised to the application under Policies T1 and T13 of the adopted Local Plan.

Conclusion

Notwithstanding the acknowledged demand for the type of tourist accommodation proposed, it is considered that the applicant has failed to make a sufficiently compelling case to justify the granting of planning permission in this instance, given the strength of the rural restraint policies that apply to development within the countryside. There is a presumption against permitting new development in the countryside ahead of the conversion of existing buildings and the conversion of an existing building could equally well provide the type of accommodation proposed under the terms of the submitted application. An in-principle objection is raised to the application under the provisions of the rural restraint policies that apply to the area and the application is accordingly recommended for refused.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under Officers’ delegated powers but has been referred to Committee for Members’ determination at the request of Councillor Kenneth Bamber because it is considered that there is a need for the proposed accommodation which outweighs the presumption against permitting new development in the rural area.]

DC0902MW 32

6 MC2004/0124

Date Received: 23rd January 2004

Location: Rear of 28 Hollywood Lane, Wainscott, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8AL

Proposal: Construction of 5 bedroomed detached house with attached garage

Applicant: Noble Guard Limited 43 Fordwich Drive Frindsbury Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr C W Luther Architectural Consultants 313a Broadway Bexleyheath Kent DA6 8DT

Ward: Strood Rural

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 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 The first floor bedroom and bathroom windows within the rear elevation of the house hereby permitted shall be installed with cill heights of not less than 1.6 metres above the floor level and shall be retained at such a height for the duration of the development.

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 other than those shown on the drawing herein approved shall be installed within the rear and side elevations of the house hereby permitted without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

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 hard surfacing materails. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with grass and plant establishment, aftercare and maintenance);

DC0902MW 33 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. The approved planting stock shall be maintained for a minimum period of five years following its planting and any of the stock that dies or is destroyed within this period shall be replanted in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing 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 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 the far end of the rear garden to 28 Hollywood Lane, which fronts onto Leigh Road. The application site measures approximately 19.3 metres wide by 20.7 metres in depth and is enclosed on the western side, fronting Leigh Road, by a 1.8 metre high wooden panel fence supported by brick piers. This fence is set back approximately 1 metre from the back edge of the footpath. Between this fence and the footpath there is a landscaping strip that forms part of the application site. To the north, adjoining 2 Leigh Road which is a newly constructed house, there is a 1.8 metre high fence with a trellis on top. There is a low fence along the eastern boundary, adjoining the rear garden to 26 Hollywood Lane, although there are some small trees and shrubs along this boundary. There is also a poplar tree within the garden of the application property, close to this boundary, which would need to be removed if the proposed development were to go ahead.

Proposal

The submitted application is for the construction of a detached four-bedroom house with attached single garage (and is tantamount to a re-submission of application MC2001/1982 which was approved on 14th March 2002, following a Member site visit, which gave consent to a 4 bedroomed house). Under the current proposal, the proposed house would essentially occupy the same footprint as that of the previously approved house and would be of the same design. The principle alteration to the previously approved house is the addition of a further 2 metres to southern (side) elevation to accommodate an enlarged lounge at ground floor level and an enlarged second bedroom. This addition has been incorporated into the proposal to enable an additional window to be provided to front of the second bedroom (as a means of escape for Building Regulation purposes), thereby enabling only high level windows to be installed within the rear elevation (as was proposed under the approved scheme to reduce the potential for the overlooking of the rear gardens to 24 and 26 Hollywood Lane). This addition has enabled the internal layout of the first floor to be re- arranged so that the bathroom is moved to the rear and an additional bedroom introduced in

DC0902MW 34 place of that bathroom. An additional window has also been introduced into the north facing side elevation, again to provide the necessary means of escape whilst maintaining high-level windows to the rear.

[It should be noted that construction works have commenced on the house approved under application reference MC2001/1982.]

Site Area/Density

Site area: 0.04 hectare (0.1 acre) Site density: 25 d.p.h. (10 d.p.a.)

Relevant Planning History

MC2001/1982 Construction of one 4-bedroom detached house with attached garage Approved 14th March 2002

MC2002/1559 Construction of two 3-bedroom detached bungalows with attached garages Refused 20th November 2002 Appeal dismissed 29th June 2003

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of: 24, 26, 28 and 32 Hollywood Lane; and 1 and 2 Leigh Road.

Frindsbury Extra Parish Council has written objecting on the grounds that a 5 bedroom house is larger than a 4 bedroom house and would be an over-intensive use of the site; and the effect on the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

Four letters have been received objecting to the application on the following grounds:

- overlooking to rear garden from 1.6m high rear bedroom windows (these windows should be 1.8m high); - overlooking from the new side bedroom window; - loss of light; - the proposal would be out of character with the street scene; - a five bedroom house would exacerbate problems previously raised by a four bedroom house; - the proposal would result in the loss of a tree; and - a 1.8m high close-boarded fence should be erected along the rear boundary prior to the development being commenced.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Vehicle Parking)

DC0902MW 35 Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy H4 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are: whether the development is acceptable in principle; design and appearance matters; amenity implications; and parking.

The principle of development

The application concerns an infill plot within an urban area and the principle of the development of a detached house on the land has been accepted with the grant of the previous planning permission and is in accordance with Policy H4 of the adopted Local Plan.

Design, appearance and impact on the character of the area

The design of the proposed house is essentially the same as that previously approved, albeit that it now includes the addition of a small hipped roof projection on the southern side. The development would amount to a southward extension to the recently completed Crest Homes development in Leigh Road. It would still leave a gap of approximately 30 metres between its southern flank wall and the rear of number 28 Hollywood Lane (compared with 32 metres under the previously approved scheme) and would still maintain the separation between the frontage development and the new development to the rear. The design of the new house would respect that of the neighbouring development. Adequate private garden space would be provided to the rear and the side of the proposed house and a substantial garden to the rear of 28 Hollywood Lane would also be retained. A small holly tree and a poplar tree would be lost as a result of the development, but neither of these are of sufficient amenity value to merit retention. In terms of design and appearance, the development is considered to be acceptable and in this respect this proposal accords with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan; Policy H4 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan).

Amenity considerations

The effect of the proposal on the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties in terms of loss of privacy, daylight and sunlight falls to be assessed under the provisions of Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan. The potential overshadowing by the proposed house was assessed under the previous scheme and it was been established that there would be minimal additional overshadowing to the rear garden of number 2 Leigh Road after 1.00 p.m. There would be no additional overshadowing to that or any other property as a result of the revised design for the house the subject of the current application.

DC0902MW 36 The previous application was amended to include the provision of 1.6m high level windows in the rear elevation, thereby reducing the potential to cause neighbourly overlooking to the rear gardens of 24 and 26 Hollywood Lane. These windows are to be retained under the current scheme and it is considered that a cill height of 1.6m will ensure that no unacceptable direct overlooking of neighbouring properties to the rear will arise from this development. The additional window on the north facing side elevation would look directly onto the rear end of the flank wall of the neighbouring property; there is only one small window on the ground floor of that property, to the front of the flank wall, serving a non-habitable room. The potential for overlooking both from and to the proposed house will therefore be minimal and the application is viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy BNE2.

Highways/parking

The adopted Vehicle Parking Standards (as maxima) require the provision of an average of 1.5 spaces per dwelling in the built up area. The submitted drawing shows parking for two cars, one in the garage and one on the drive. Having regard to the site’s location in a suburban area, this level of provision is considered to be acceptable and no objection is raised to the proposal under the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan, Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy TP19 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Conclusion

In the light of the application history for this site and the relatively modest changes to the design of the previously approved house proposed under the terms of the current submitted application, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in all regards. The application is accordingly recommended for approval.

[This application would normally fall to be considered under the officers’ delegated powers but has been reported for Members’ consideration because of the number of representations that have been received.]

[This application was considered by Members at the West Area Development Control Committee on the 8th April 2004 when it was determined to defer a decision to enable a Members’ site visit to be held.]

DC0902MW 37

7 MC2004/0309

Date Received: 18th February 2004

Location: 39 Jarrett Avenue, Wainscott, Rochester, Kent, ME2 4NN

Proposal: Insertion of dormer to rear to facilitate loft conversion

Applicant: Mr & Mrs M Brooks 39 Jarrett Avenue Wainscott Rochester Kent ME2 4NN

Agent:

Ward: Strood Rural

Recommendation - Refusal

1 The proposed dormer, due to its design, scale and siting, would appear as an incongruous addition to the application property. The proposed development would be detrimental to the appearance of the application property and the street scene and is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy ENV15 of Kent Structure Plan 1996, Policy BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and Policy QL1 of the Kent & Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Plan) 2003.

Site Description

The application property is a two storey semi-detached house, which has been extended by the construction of a two-storey side extension that was granted planning permission in the early 1980s. The application property is located within a residential area and the majority of the houses in the surrounding area are of a similar design. The application site is situated at the corner of Jarrett Avenue and Newenden Road and the house is at a higher ground level than the street, being approximately 0.5 metres higher than the road.

There are a number of properties within Newenden Road that have rear dormer windows, but none of these are readily seen from the public highway.

Proposal

The submitted application is for the construction of a rear dormer window within the property’s original roof plane. The proposed dormer is of a flat roofed design that would be approximately 5.5 metres wide. The bottom of the dormer would be set in 700mm from the line of the property’s main rear elevation and would extend up to the property’s main ridgeline. The cheeks of the dormer would be inset 500mm from the party boundary with the neighbouring property at number 37 and the line of the application property’s original gable wall.

The proposed dormer would accommodate an additional bedroom, a shower room and a stairwell. The new accommodation would in part be illuminated by 3 rooflights installed with the front roof plane.

DC0902MW 38 Relevant History

ME/82/252 Two storey side extension with porch Approved 9th June 1982

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of: 37 and 41 Jarrett Avenue; and 1 and 22 Newenden Road.

Frindsbury Extra Parish Council has written raising no objection to the application.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV15 (Built Environment)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration arising from this application are: the design and appearance of the proposal and its affect upon the street scene; and the affect of the development on the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties.

Design and Appearance

The proposed dormer is of a ‘box’ design, with a flat roof that would be set at the ridge level of the originally constructed house. The dormer would have limited insets off the rear structural wall and the party boundary and the original gable wall of the house, with the result that it would not quite completely occupy the property’s original rear roof plane. However, the dormer would still be large, at 5.5 metres wide, occupying a very significant proportion of the original roof plane area. The dormer’s presence would be very visible from Newenden Road, given the application property’s corner location and the slight incline in that street.

The proposed dormer is therefore considered to be an inappropriate form of extension in this case that would have an incongruous and unduly prominent appearance within the local street scene. It is to be noted that the application property has a relatively shallow roof pitch that limits the available internal headroom, which is of particular significance when consideration is being given to the installation of a staircase to gain access to roof accommodation. In this case it would appear that the only way that sufficient staircase headroom can be created is to utilise a dormer design that projects up to the ridgeline and this limitation upon the design of the proposed dormer is contributing significantly to the “boxy” nature of its appearance.

DC0902MW 39

The design of the dormer and its implications for the streetscape are considered to be unacceptable and the application is therefore viewed as being contrary to the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan).

Amenity Considerations

Due to the location of the proposed dormer and the application property’s relationship with the neighbouring properties, it is considered that this proposal would not have any detrimental affects upon the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring houses in terms of loss of outlook, privacy, light or overshadowing.

No objection in amenity terms is therefore raised to the application under the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Conclusion

For the reasons stated above the design of the proposed dormer is considered to be unacceptable and the application is accordingly recommended for refusal.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under officer’s delegated powers but has been referred for Members’ consideration because the applicants are relatives of Councillor Davis.]

DC0902MW 40

8 MC2004/0506

Date Received: 11th March 2004

Location: 23 The Shades, Rochester, Kent, ME2 2UD

Proposal: Construction of a two storey rear extension

Applicant: Mr F W Bacon 23 The Shades Strood Rochester Kent

Agent: Mr J Liddiard 14 Wentworth Drive Cliffe Woods Rochester Kent ME3 8UL

Ward: Strood South

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

3 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 flank wall(s) of the extension herein approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Site Description

This application concerns a detached two storey house located on the southern side of the street, in a residential area that comprises detached properties of various designs. The application property and the neighbouring house at number 21 are of the same design, but are handed and their front and rear elevations align with one another.

The ground level of the application property is approximately 0.4 metres higher than that for number 21. There is a gap between the application property and number 21 of approximately 2 metres. Both numbers 21 and 23 have had conservatories added to their rear elevations.

The application property backs onto numbers 28 and 30 Stangate Road and the rear elevations of those properties are approximately 55 metres away.

Proposal

The submitted application proposes the construction of a two storey rear extension to the eastern side of the rear elevation, that would be 3.1 metres wide, projecting to a depth of 3.1 metres. The extension would comprise a breakfast room at ground floor level and a bedroom

DC0902MW 41 at first floor level. The proposed extension would have a pitched roof and would be clad in facing bricks and tiles to match the existing house.

Representations

Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of numbers: 21 and 25 The Shades; and 28 and 30 Stangate Road.

No representations have been received.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy ENV15 (Built Environment)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection)

Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration arising from this proposal are its design and appearance; and the extensions implications for the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties.

Design and Appearance

The design of the proposed extension compliments the existing house and the proposals therefore accord with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003 (the emerging Structure Plan).

Amenity Considerations

Due to the gap between the numbers 21 and 23 and the window arrangements for numbers 21 and 25, it is considered that the proposed extension will not adversely affect the outlook from either of the neighbouring properties. Similarly the construction of the proposed extension will not adversely impact upon the existing level of privacy enjoyed by the occupiers of the neighbouring houses in either The Shades or Stangate Road.

The property immediately adjacent to the extension, number 21, has a door located in the flank wall between the dwellings, that gives access to the garden from the kitchen and also has a window within the rear elevation serving the kitchen. Due to the separation between numbers 21 and 23 the proposed extension will not cause a significant loss of daylight to the kitchen area for number 21.

DC0902MW 42 The proposed extension will cause some additional overshadowing of the rear garden area to number 21. However due to the limited depth of the extension and the separation between the houses, the additional overshadowing that will arise will not be of an unreasonable extent or duration.

In amenity terms the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable and the proposals are therefore viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan, Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy QL1 of the emerging Structure Plan.

Conclusion

The proposed extension is considered to be acceptable in all regards and the application is accordingly recommended for approval.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under officer’s delegated powers but is being reported for Members’ determination because the applicant is Councillor Bacon.]

DC0902MW 43 9 MC2004/0686

Date Received: 1st April 2004

Location: Land at Toad Hall and The Searchlight, Main Road, Chattenden, Rochester, Kent, ME3 8PR

Proposal: Outline application for residential development at a density of not less than 30 dwellings to the hectare

Applicant: Ward Homes Limited 2 Ash Tree Lane Chatham Kent ME5 7BZ

Agent: David Hicken Associates Southgate House High Banks Loose Maidstone Kent ME15 0EQ

Ward: Strood Rural

Recommendation

Members resolve that the application be approved at the expiry of the consultation period subject to there being no representations received after the Committee date and by the end of the consultation period which raise new issues not already considered within this report and that that approval be subject to the following:

A) The applicant entering into an agreement/obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure:

i. a contribution of £4,370 per dwelling of two or more bedrooms towards the provision of educational facilities in the locality; ii. a contribution of up to £300 per one bedroom dwelling, £551.50 per two bedroom dwelling and £811 per dwelling of three or more bedrooms towards the provision of equipped play facilities and formal sports provision in the locality; iii. the provision of 25% key worker/shared ownership units with grant funding. iv. the submission of an assessment of the impact of the proposal on the adjoining Site of Special Scientific Interest, Special Protection Area and Ramsar site together with measures to protect the Site of Special Scientific Interest from damage that might be caused by unauthorised access or dumping both during the construction of the development and the occupation of the development when complete.

B) the following conditions:

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

DC0902MW 44 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.

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 The plans and particulars submitted in accordance with Condition 1 above shall include:

a) A plan showing the location of and allocating a reference number to each existing tree on site which has a stem with a diameter, measured over the bark at a point 1.5 metres above ground level, exceeding 75mm, showing which trees are to be retained and the crown spread of each retained and the crown spread of each retained tree;

b) details of the species, diameter (measured in accordance with paragraph a) above, and the approximate height and an assessment of the general state of health and stability, of each retained tree and of each tree which is on land adjacent to the site and to which paragraphs c) and d) below apply;

c) details of any proposed topping or lopping of any retained tree, or of any tree on land adjacent to the site;

d) details of any proposed alterations in existing ground levels and of the position of any proposed excavation within the crown spread of any retained tree or of any tree on land adjacent to the site within a distance of 6 metres from any retained tree, or any tree on land adjacent to the site, equivalent to half the height of that tree;

e) details of the specification and position of fencing and of any other measures to be taken for the protection of any retained tree from damage before or during the course of development.

In this Condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with paragraph a) above.

DC0902MW 45 7 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 the existing and proposed ground levels; means of enclosure, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; 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.

8 A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than small, privately owned, domestic gardens, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner, for its permitted use. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved.

9 The details submitted pursuant to Condition 1 shall include the proposed road layout, together with details of pedestrian and cycle routes.

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.

Site Description

This application relates to 3.46 hectares of land to the south of Main Road and east of Elm Avenue, Chattenden, and is essentially the same site that was the subject of the earlier and now determined application MC2003/0316 except that the area for the current application includes the existing vehicular access to Toad Hall from main Road. The site also includes part of the curtilage of 23 Elm Avenue. The site comprises two elements Toad Hall and Searchlight.

Toad Hall

Toad Hall, an area of land containing a detached single storey dwelling, together with old storage sheds, formerly used as a nursery. The site is grassed and used for grazing, with vegetation comprising a mix of native planting and ornamental conifers. There is, however, significant planting along the eastern boundary to the site. Access to the Toad Hall is via a tree-lined driveway leading from Main Road that passes between Broadwood House and Delcott.

DC0902MW 46 Searchlight

Searchlight forms the southern part of the application site and lies immediately to the south of Toad Hall. Searchlight is separated from Toad Hall by a public footpath (the Saxon Shore Way) that runs from Elm Avenue eastwards towards Hoo St Werburgh. Searchlight comprises a derelict dwelling, together with its curtilage. The land is grassed and unused, with native tree species interspersed and along the boundary. Access to Searchlight is achieved via a narrow trackway running from Elm Avenue and running between Lingley House and Peppercorn.

The application site as a whole is bounded to the north and east by the rear gardens of the dwellings in Main Road and Elm Avenue. Generally, these boundaries are well screened by trees and fencing. Immediately to the south of the public footpath separating Toad Hall from Searchlight are two houses, 41 and 41a Elm Avenue, which have been built to the rear of the other properties in Elm Avenue. The curtilages of these two houses in effect project as an enclave into the application site’s western boundary.

Immediately to the south of the application site is an area of native oak woodland, which forms part of the Tower Hill to Cockham Wood Site of Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). At this point the land starts to slope steeply towards the River Medway. A mixture of conifer and native tree species defines the eastern boundary of the site, beyond which is open farmland.

Proposal

The currently submitted application is a resubmission of outline application MC2003/2304 which was refused planning permission, contrary to the officer recommendation, on 10 December 2003 on the following grounds:

“1. The proposed access will provide inadequate ingress and egress arrangements for the scale of the development proposed.

2. The proposal constitutes unacceptable backland development and is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy H9 of the Medway Local Plan 2003.”

Application MC2003/2304, together with application MC2003/0316 (a full application for 105 houses and flats on this site), are now the subject of appeals that are due to be considered at a public inquiry commencing on 29 June 2004.

The details concerning the current application are as previously submitted and are set out below as originally reported on 10 December 2004.

“The application has been submitted in outline form and is for the residential development of the land at a density of not less than 30 dwellings per hectare (12 dwellings per acre). All matters (siting, design, external appearance and landscaping), other than means of access to the site, are reserved for future consideration. The means of access to the site will be via the existing access to Toad Hall, off Main Road and will be in accordance with the access arrangements approved under application reference MC2003/1093, with an emergency access is shown via the trackway between Elm Avenue and Searchlight.

DC0902MW 47 [The land to the north of Toad Hall, to the rear of Main Road and 3-11 Elm Avenue, was the subject of an outline planning application (MC2003/1702) for 12 detached dwellings with garages and associated access road. The dwellings the subject of this application were shown to be accessed via the Toad Hall site. Application MC2003/1702 has subsequently been withdrawn and replaced with application MC2003/2433 which is an outline application for the construction of 11 dwellings accessed via Elm Avenue…]”

Application MC2003/2438 was subsequently refused planning permission on 18 February 2004 on the grounds that: this proposal represented: piecemeal backland development; inefficient use of land; and the access arrangements would be prejudicial to and highway safety.

Site area/site density

Site area 3.46 hectares (8.55 acres)

Relevant Planning History

Toad Hall

MC2001/1093 Alterations to site access and inclusion of traffic calming works. Approved 18th September 2001

Searchlight

ME/94/0822 Outline application for the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of one replacement dwelling. Approved 12th January 1995

ME/94/0897 Outline application for one detached dwelling with garage. Refused 6th February 1995

ME/94/0898 Outline application for detached dwelling with garage. Refused 12th January 1995

ME/99/0203/MR Application for demolition of existing dwelling and erection of one replacement dwelling. Approved 9th June 1999

Toad Hall and the Searchlight

MC2003/0316 Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of land at The Searchlight with 36 apartments and the construction of 4 mews dwellings and 3 terraced houses with garage courts and parking within the grounds; and the erection of 13 five bedroom houses, 13 four bedroom houses, 17 three bedroom houses, 4 two bedroom houses and 15 two bedroom flats on land at Toad Hall, with garages. Refused 9th October 2003 Appeal, to be determined by means of a Public Inquiry commencing on 29 June 2004.

DC0902MW 48 MC2003/2304 Outline application for residential development at a density of not less than 30 dwellings to the hectare Refused 10 December 2003 Appeal, to be determined by means of a Public Inquiry commencing on 29 June 2004.

Representations

The application has been advertised on site and in the press as a Major Development. Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of: 1, 1a, 3-41(odd), 41a, 43-51(odd), Lingley House and Peppercorn, Elm Avenue; and Tamarisk, Wychwood, Lismore House, Mill Avon, Ivy Cottage, Wheatcroft, The Briars and 13-16 Haig Villas, Main Road and to any other objectors to the previous application. Consultations have also been undertaken with the Environment Agency, Southern Water Services, Kent County Constabulary, English Nature, the Kent Wildlife Trust, the RSPB, The Primary Care Trust and the West Kent Health Authority.

At the time of preparing this report the following representations had been received:

Hoo St Werburgh parish Council has written objecting to the application for the following reasons:

- Access and egress to the site is inadequate to serve the density of development proposed and would create unacceptable additional hazards to traffic in Main Road.

- The proposal would constitute an undesirable form of backland development without any road frontage and would be detrimental to the privacy and residential amenities of adjacent properties.

- The proposed development would constitute an unwarranted extension of the built-up area into open countryside.

- The proposal would be undesirable in an area, which is predominately rural in character and would be detrimental to the rural amenities of the locality.

- The proposal would result in an overintensive use of the land, (out of character with other development in the immediate locality).

Three letters of representation have been received objecting to the application on the following grounds:

- a development of the scale proposed will double the number of dwellings in the area and affect local community spirit;

- the application site is not a brownfield site;

- the proposed development will result in the loss of views; and

- the development will place additional pressures upon local facilities, including schools and medical and community facilities

DC0902MW 49 English Nature has written commenting that as a consequence of the application site’s proximity to a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) there is a duty upon the Council to ensure that the SSSI is conserved and enhanced. The applicant’s proposals to protect the SSSI during both the construction and occupation phases of the development, namely the use of fencing, bunding and native hedge planting are welcomed. In order to avoid unauthorised encroachment into the SSSI it will be necessary to ensure that once the development is complete the protective measures are maintained in perpetuity. English nature has further submitted that at along the boundary of the application site and the adjoining SSSI that it would not support bank stabilisation or re-profiling works designed the development that would adversely affect the SSSI.

The Environment Agency has written raising no objection to the application and further commenting that it welcomes the applicant’s intention to a “Sustainable Drainage System”. Alternatively the surface water discharging to a watercourse may be acceptable provided the receiving watercourse has sufficient capacity and forms part of a continuous drainage system.

The Kent Wildlife Trust has written raising no objection to the application but has requested that conditions are imposed on any forthcoming planning permission: requiring the installation and retention of a 3 metre high stock-proof palisade fence along the southern boundary of the site; the preclusion of access to the SSSI to prevent disturbance of the wildlife within the designated area; and the establishment of a buffer zone between the development and Cockham Wood to protect the trees from pressures to trim or remove them. The Trust has further commented that wildlife and habitat features should be respected in the layout of houses and roads.

The Kent and Medway Towns Fire Authority has written commenting that the “emergency access” via Elm Avenue must be provided to a width that complies with the requirements of Part B of the Building Regulations and the County of Kent Act.

Any representations that are received following the preparation of this report will be reported at the committee meeting. As any such representations are likely to be similar to those that were received in connection with outline application MC2003/2304, the summary of the representations that was reported in relation to that earlier application has been appended to this report for information – see Appendix 1.

It should be further noted that while the period for making representations in response to the receipt of the vast majority of neighbourhood notification letters expired on 23 April 2004, the period for representations to be made in response to the press notice does not expire until 6 May and there is one neighbourhood consultation that lapses on 29 April.

Development Plan Policies

Kent Structure Plan 1996

Policy S9 (Infrastructure and Community Facilities) Policy ENV5 (Designated Nature Conservation Areas) Policy ENV7 (Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows) Policy ENV15 (Built Environment) Policy T17 (Parking) Policy T18 (Traffic Generation)

DC0902MW 50 Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy S6 (Planning Obligations) Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE6 (Landscape Design) Policy BNE34 (Areas of Local Landscape Importance) Policy BNE35 (International and National Nature Conservation Sites) Policy BNE43 (Trees on Development Sites) Policy H1 (New Residential Development) Policy H3 (Affordable Housing) Policy T1 (Impact of Development) Policy T2 (Access to Highway) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal

The main issues for consideration arising from this proposal are: matters of principle; the effect on the character of the area; the impact on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring and nearby properties, the effect on the adjoining Area of Local Landscape Importance and Site of Special Scientific Interest; traffic generation, access and parking matters; the provision of affordable housing; and the need for infrastructure contributions.

Guidelines for the provision of affordable housing; and the need for infrastructure contributions can be identified although the exact number of units involved and the amount of any contributions can only be identified at the detailed stage.

In considering the current application Members are reminded that Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the provisions of the development plan unless there are material considerations justifying a departure from the plan. In this case, the development plan includes the Medway Local Plan, which was adopted relatively recently, in 2003, and is therefore up to date.

It is also important to have regard to the fact that the purpose of an outline application is to establish the acceptability in principle of a development, without the applicant having to specify the details of ‘reserved matters’ such as design, landscaping etc. Matters of detail, for example siting, design and appearance, can and should be assessed in full when reserved matters applications are submitted pursuant to the grant of an outline planning permission.

Given that the details of currently submitted application are identical to those for the earlier outline application MC2003/2304, the officer appraisal of the determining issues is as previously reported and is set out below in full.

“Background and matters of principle

The allocation of the Toad Hall and Searchlight sites for residential development was the subject of detailed consideration during the Local Plan Inquiry. The Inquiry Inspector concluded that the development of Toad Hall “…. would make an effective use of an under-utilised site on the edge of Chattenden, well contained from the surrounding countryside and in a reasonably sustainable location.” However the

DC0902MW 51 Inspector expressed a major concern that the original allocation of 30 units on the Toad Hall site was too few for the site and that such a level of development, at barely 10 units per hectare, would amount to an “inefficient use of land”. The Inspector went onto comment that:

“Although the surrounding area comprises low density detached houses and bungalows, I see no reason why this should be repeated in adjoining development. This site offers the opportunity for a compact development at a much higher density than that envisaged, without eroding the well-vegetated nature of the site, the amenity of surrounding residents or the rural character of Chattenden. I therefore recommend the Council to reconsider the density of this site [Toad Hall], increasing the capacity to at least 80 dwellings to make more efficient use of this development land, in line with the guidance in PPG3.”

The Inspector also considered whether Searchlight should also be allocated for residential development and concluded in the affirmative. The Inspector further concluded that Searchlight should be developed at a similar density to that recommended for Toad Hall on the basis that it is a previously developed site adjoining both an existing settlement and a proposed housing site [Toad Hall]. The Inspector considered that Searchlight could accommodate up to 25 units applying the density standard of 30 units to the hectare. The Inspector accepted that the development of both the Searchlight and Toad Hall sites would represent a significant addition to Chattenden that “… might have implications for the settlement, not only in terms of additional population and traffic. However it could also support existing facilities and possibly result in new facilities, bolstering the community in the longer term. It could also create a more balanced and mixed community, reflecting the guidance in PPG3.”

Given the Inspector’s recommendations, Toad Hall and Searchlight have been identified as a new housing allocation under the provisions of Policy H1 (allocation ME389) of the Medway Local Plan 2003 (the adopted Local Plan) with an indicative site capacity of 105 units. It should be noted that the allocation for Toad Hall includes land to the rear of Main Road that is outside the control of the applicants and does not form part of the current application site.

The nominal site capacity for Toad Hall and Searchlight identified in the Local Plan yields a site density of 26 units per hectare, which falls short of the required minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare specified in the South East England Density Direction 2002. It is to be noted that developments that do not achieve the minimum density specified in the direction must be referred to the Government Office for the South East for further consideration before planning permission can be granted and following that referral may become the subject of a public inquiry prior to the Deputy Prime Minister issuing a decision. The current application seeks to address this by establishing the principle of development of the land at a density that would comply with the afore-mentioned direction. Applying the minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare to the site area of 3.46 hectares would result in a minimum of 104 dwellings.

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle because it complies with the provisions of Policy H1 of the adopted Local Plan and the requirements of the Density Direction.

DC0902MW 52 Effect on the character of the area

As the application is in outline form, with all matters reserved for future consideration, the full impact of the development on the character of the area will fall to be assessed at the detailed design stage when a detailed pursuant application will have to be submitted for consideration. Nevertheless, it is considered that the site can be developed in a manner that would not adversely affect the character of the area. No objection can therefore be raised to the proposal at this time under the provisions of Policies RS1 and RS2 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE1 and of the adopted Local Plan.

Amenity

Although the application has been submitted in outline form, it is considered that the site can be developed in a manner that will not adversely affect amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in terms of privacy, daylight or sunlight and disturbance having regard to the likely levels of block spacing that will be achieved given the back garden lengths of the majority of the neighbouring properties. In this regard the application is viewed as being in accordance with the provisions of Policy ENV15 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan.

The effect on the Neighbouring Area of Local Landscape Importance and Site of Special Scientific Interest

The land immediately to the south of the Searchlight forms part of the Tower Hill to Cockham Wood SSSI, Special Protection Area for Birds and Ramsar site and therefore the proposal falls to be assessed under the provisions of Policy ENV5 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE34 and BNE35 of the adopted Local Plan. Subject to the provision of appropriate safeguards essentially the introduction of physical measures to preclude unauthorised entry into the designated areas of nature conservation interest, it is considered that the nature conservation value of the area can be appropriately safeguarded. It is recommended that the required safeguarding measures are made the subject of the Section 106 agreement accompanying any forthcoming planning permission for the proposed development.

With respect to landscape considerations it is considered that this site can be developed in a manner that will not prejudice the landscape value of the surrounding area.

Traffic Generation, Access and Parking

The impact of the proposal in terms of traffic generation falls to be assessed under Policy T18 of the Structure Plan and Policy T1 of the adopted Local Plan. An assessment of this impact has been carried out by consultants working on behalf of the Council. Currently around 8,000 vehicles use Main Road in a 24 hour period with a two-way peak flow of around 900 vehicles per hour in the morning and 700 in the evening. However, it is anticipated that most of this traffic will be diverted away from Main Road after the autumn 2004 when the A228 improvement works have been completed, when this section of Main Road will serve local traffic travelling to and from Chattenden to the south of the A228.

DC0902MW 53 The proposed development is likely to generate daily in and out flows of around 280 vehicles, with a morning peak hour flow of 40/50 vehicles out and 10 vehicles in and an evening peak of 30/40 vehicles in and 10/20 out. Alterations to the site access, including traffic calming works to serve the development of this site were approved on 18th September 2001 under application reference MC2001/1093. It is, therefore considered that the approved access and the local highway network has the capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development.

Although the application is in outline form, it is considered that the site can be developed in a manner that will meet the requirements of the adopted vehicle standards. No parking objection is therefore raised to the application under the provisions of Policy T17 of the Structure Plan and Policy T13 of the adopted Local Plan.

The application site is well served by public transport with bus stops on either side of Main Road, approximately 100 metres from the site entrance and a bus frequency of six buses per hour.

No highway objections are raised to the application.

Affordable housing

In accordance with the provisions of Policy H3 of the adopted Local Plan, affordable housing is to be sought at the rate of 25%. The applicants have offered to allocate 25% of the proposed dwellings as key worker or shared ownership housing with grant funding. This offer is acceptable to the Assistant Director of Health and Community (Housing). It is therefore recommended that this affordable housing requirement is incorporated into the proposed Section 106 Agreement.

Infrastructure Contributions (Education)

The application site is in an area of identified school roll growth, with little or no spare capacity in the local schools. The proposed development would add a further demand upon school places in the area. Applying the standard pupil product ratios of 0.5 for primary school spaces and 0.2 for secondary school places to dwellings of two or more bedrooms, the proposed development will yield a combined primary and secondary place contribution of £4,370 per unit. It is therefore recommended that the identified school facilities contribution be secured by means of the proposed Section 106 agreement.

Infrastructure Contributions (Open Space)

Policy L4 of the adopted Local Plan requires residential schemes to make open space provision where there is a proven deficiency. This policy applies the National Playing Field Association (NPFA) standards of: 1.7 hectares per 1,000 people for formal recreation space; and 0.7 hectare of children’s play space and casual recreation space. Applying these standards to the application and making an allowance for the anticipated occupancy rates, the proposal is likely to yield a requirement for 0.5 hectare of sports pitches and 0.24 hectare of children’s play space of which 0.06 hectare would be equipped and 0.18 informal open space.

DC0902MW 54 There is approximately 2.5 hectares of informal open space, which includes a play area of approximately 0.5 hectare at the southern end of Elm Avenue, which is within easy walking distance of the application site and is owned by Hoo St Werburgh Parish Council. This primarily serves the population to the south of the A228, around 550 people. With the addition of around 300 people to the area as a result of the proposed development, there would still be more than enough play space to serve the area and the proposed development when the NPFA standards and the requirements of Policy L4 are applied to the submitted proposals.

To address any potential shortfall in the provision of these facilities resulting from the proposal, it is recommended that contributions of up to £300 per one bedroom dwelling, £551.50 per two bedroom dwelling and £811 per dwelling of three or more bedrooms be sought towards the provision of equipped play facilities and formal sports provision in the locality.

Having regard to the provisions of Policy S9 of the Structure Plan and Policy S6 of the adopted Local Plan, it is considered that a these contributions should be sought by way of a Section 106 Agreement.”

Recommendation

For the reasons stated above the application is considered to be acceptable in all regards and is accordingly recommended for approval, subject to the applicant entering into the recommended Section 106 Agreement. In making this recommendation Members are reminded of the fact that reserved matters applications made pursuant to an outline permission can be refused if the details contained within such submissions are considered to be unacceptable.

[This application would normally fall to be determined under officers’ delegated powers but is being reported for Members’ consideration because of the number of representations that have been received.

This application is reported to Committee at the earliest opportunity because of the imminent appeal public inquiry. However because the full consultation period does not expire until 6 May 2004 and consequently a decision notice for this application cannot not be issued until the consultation period has elapsed. Members are therefore being requested to consider the application at this meeting and to resolve to approve it with the issuing of the decision notice being deferred until 6 May subject to no representations being received between the committee date and 6 May 2004 that raise issues not already addressed within this report and any representations reported to members at the Committee meeting.]

DC0902MW 55 Appendix 1

Summary of representations received in response to application MC2003/2304

Hoo St. Werburgh Parish Council has written objecting to the application on the grounds that:

- the application is imprecise; - no maximum density is specified, which could lead to a much higher figure than 30 dwellings per hectare; and - no indication is given as to the type of properties, where they are to be built and what future provision will be required for schools, surgeries, water, sewerage etc.

The Dickens Country Protection Society has written objecting to the application on the grounds that the density is too high.

Twelve letters have been received objecting to the application on the grounds that:

- the density is too high and the development would be out of character with surroundings; - no details of the type of properties have been submitted; - the proposal could have an adverse affect on neighbouring properties and on the local community; - the development will result in the loss of outlook and privacy; - noise pollution, particularly from vehicles entering and leaving the site; - Elm Avenue is unable to take additional traffic; - there are inadequate medical facilities in locality to serve the development; - the development should not be undertaken until the A228 road improvements have been completed; - the proposal is contrary to the provisions of the Local Plan which allocates 105 houses over the entire site; - 30 units per hectare should be the maximum density for the site; - the access road is inadequate; - the access should be moved further east along Main Road; - the development will have an adverse impact on wildlife; - insufficient information has been submitted with the application, the application does not give an indication of what on-site parking provision will be made and what provision is to be made for schooling needs associated with the development; and - the proposal would contravene Article 8 of Human Rights Convention (Respect for Family and Home Life).

[A representation has been received commenting that the submitted proposals contravene Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which states that "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondence." Having regard to the assessment of amenity implications outlined in the main report for this application and the provisions of the Humans Right Act, it is considered that the proposed development will not infringe upon the rights of adjoining owners and occupiers because the scheme is capable of being designed to ameliorate the concerns of residents and conditions can be imposed to address specific amenity concerns.

DC0902MW 56

The Environment Agency has written commenting that water conservation techniques should be incorporated into the design of the development.

The Kent Wildlife Trust has written raising no objection to the application but has requested that conditions are imposed on any forthcoming planning permission: requiring the installation and retention of a 3 metre high stock-proof palisade fence along the southern boundary of the site; the preclusion of access to the SSSI to prevent disturbance of the wildlife within the designated area; and the establishment of a buffer zone between the development and Cockham Wood to protect the trees from pressures to trim or remove them. The Trust has further commented that wildlife and habitat features should be respected in the layout of houses and roads.

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has written advising that it has no comments to make on the application.

DC0902MW 57