8 week date Application No. Date of meeting Report No. 30/6/2009 GR/09/0479 7/10/2009 Rose Smallholdings, Harvel Road, Meopham, Gravesend, Kent, DA13 0RN. Retention of the dog kennel for the housing of six dogs. Mr Russell Bennett Recommendation: Permission subjection to conditions see page 10 1. Site Description The application site is located in open countryside on the north west side of Harvel Road, Meopham, south of Culverstone Green and close to Vigo Village, a modern village built on the site of a wartime army camp in the 1960’s. The application site is run as a smallholding on some 19 acres of land (7.7 hectares) including about 5 acres (2 hectares) of wood and residential/amenity areas with the remaining 14 acres (5.7 hectares) of grassland. The site is divided into a number of fields. A driveway from Harvel Road gives access to a group of buildings set back from the road by some 70m which are enclosed by walls and a gate containing the applicant’s residence (originally an agricultural barn), and several storage and other outbuildings. The dwelling, which has a brick and stone exterior and a tiled roof, has a conservatory extension at the rear and a flat roofed addition at the front. A further brick and tiled building is used for a bedroom with en-suite bathroom. A flat roofed L shaped storage building now clad with white ship-lap boarding was being used for domestic storage and contained a toilet and was also used for incubating wildfowl. To the rear of the dwelling is an enclosed paddock containing a new timber building of three stables set below ground level on a concrete apron which were built in 2005 but are not used as stables. One of the stables was used for storage and contained racking. South of the dwelling is a portacabin on a concrete base which is being used as an office to run a transport business from the holding. There is no planning permission for such use or for the portacabin and the retention of the portacabin was subject to recent application GR/2009/0480 which was refused under delegated powers on 26 August 2009. South of the stables are the dog kennels which are the subject of this application. 2. Planning History The past planning history is very complex and detailed. Originally the site formed part of a large agricultural holding known as Rose Farm. In 1977 Rose Farm was fragmented and Rose Smallholding formed one of eight lots which were sold off. In July 1979 the Borough Council imposed an Article 4 Direction on the former Rose Farm removing permitted development rights for various classes of development including agricultural development and all means of enclosure in order to maintain planning controls over the fragmented land. The Direction remains in force. The site was also the subject of a planning enforcement notice which was served on 3 January 1990 regarding the erection of a barn within the site. The following are some of the other key planning decisions. In 1981 planning permission was refused on Green Belt, landscape and countryside character grounds for an application (reference GR/81/354) for a stable block consisting of 2 stables and a hay store. An appeal was dismissed on 18 March 1982, the Inspector determining that such a building constituted sporadic development out of keeping with the rural character of the area. In 1991 permission was refused for and application (GR/90/751) for the erection of a barn for the accommodation of livestock on Green Belt, landscape and lack of agricultural need grounds. A Lawful Development Certificate application for residential use of a hay storage barn on the site was refused in 1993 on grounds of evidence lacking proof, some documents not being genuine, and other documents being contradictory. However an Inspector at appeal, following a public inquiry, found favour with the appellant’s evidence, that on the balance or probabilities the barn had been used residentially for 4 years, and allowed the appeal on 18 January 1995. Subsequently in the light of that decision the Borough Council gave permission for a residential curtilage in 1996. Permission was given for a change of use of agricultural land to part agriculture and part equestrian and erection of a field shelter in 1996 (GR/96/227). The field shelter was subject to a condition not to be used for stables. It was erected in the south west corner of the site. Planning permission was refused on Green Belt and landscape grounds for an application (GR/96/271) for a stud farm including a range of new buildings to the south west of the existing dwelling. Permission was given in 2001 for a rear conservatory to the existing dwelling and refused for a double garage also in 2001 – the latter for reasons of detriment to the openness of the Green Belt and detriment to the landscape. Permission was also refused for front pillars and walls. In 2001 permission was refused for an application (GR/2001/0059) for a block of three stables to be sited where the portacabin is now and to the south west of the existing dwelling. The reasons for refusal were:- 1. The proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy MGB3 of the Kent Structure Plan, Policy GB2 of the Gravesham Local Plan First Review and Policy RA2 of the Gravesham Local Plan 2nd Review (Deposit Version), which include the site within the Metropolitan Green Belt. Within the Green Belt there is a strong presumption against permitting new development outside the present confines of 2 REPORT NO PAGE urban areas and villages unless it conforms with the open recreational functions of the Green Belt or is directly related to agriculture or other land uses appropriate to a rural area. The proposed stable block constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt and by virtue of its size, siting and design would undermine the openness of the surrounding area. 2. The proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy ENV4 and RS1 of the approved Kent Structure Plan, Policy C4 of the Gravesham Local Plan First Review and Policy NE2 of the Gravesham Local Plan 2nd Review (Deposit Version). These policies give long term protection to Special Landscape Areas and the Green Belt and give priority to their landscape over other planning considerations. The erection of the stable block would be detrimental to the open, rural qualities of the surrounding landscape. 3. The proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy C17 of the Gravesham Local Plan First Review and Policy RA20 of the Gravesham Local Plan 2nd Review (Deposit Version) which refer to the recreational use of land for horse- riding, riding schools and the erection of stables in the countryside. The erection of the stable block is not compatible with the agricultural and landscape policies in the Local Plan and would be detrimental to the open, rural qualities of the surrounding area. 4. Insufficient detail has been provided in accordance with Article 3(1)(b) of the Town and Country Planning (Applications) Regulations 1988, to allow the proposed use of the stable block and the surrounding land to be accurately assessed. A subsequent appeal (APP/K2230/A/01/1071166) was dismissed. The appeal turned not on whether the stable were inappropriate development or on the design of the building but solely on its prominent siting. The Inspector commented: “Given the planning policy background and the recognised landscape quality of the area, it is necessary, in my view, to ensure that any further development here fully respects its environmental and landscape context” Subsequently permission was granted in November 2001 for a block of three stables (GR/2001/0364) stated on the drawings as being 10m x 4m but scaled as 10.9m x 4m. Internally the stables as shown on the drawing were 3.5m x 3.5m. The stable block was shown to be site to the rear of the group of existing buildings on the site to the north west of the dwelling. A planning condition required removal of an existing container on the site (however it appears this has just been moved elsewhere on the site). The stable have been built but have not been used as stable as they were apparently built too small. Two further applications were submitted (GR/2008/0468) for the erection of a barn for the storage of hay, feed, plant and machinery and (GR/2008/0469) for the erection of a block of three stables which was permitted. The reasons for refusal on GR/2008/468 were:- 1. The development by reason of its size, scale and siting would be inappropriate development and seriously prejudicial to the openness of the Metropolitan Green Belt within which the application site is located. The development is therefore contrary to policy SS2 and SS8 of the adopted Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and policy GB2 of the adopted Gravesham Local Plan First Review 1994. No very special circumstances have been submitted to justify the development and the development is also contrary to the advice in PPG2 (Green Belts). 3 REPORT NO PAGE 2. The application site lies within the North Downs Special Landscape Area. The primary objective of the Special Landscape Areas is the protection, conservation and enhancement of the quality of the landscape and where normally priority is given to the landscape over other planning considerations. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the size, scale and siting of the development are such that it would cause harm to the sensitive landscape setting and unacceptably injure the open character and visual amenities of the Special Landscape Area.