PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR 13 AUGUST 2008 Page no. 1 MC2007/0553 Rochester West Details pursuant to condition 7 (lighting) of planning permission MC2007/0553 for the construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300 additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing HMP, Rochester, Kent ME1 3LU 3 2 MC2007/0553 Rochester West Details pursuant to condition 3 (landscaping) and 4 (landscape management) of planning permission MC2007/0553 for the construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300 additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing HMP, Rochester, Kent ME1 3LU 9 3 MC2007/1498 Strood North Demolition of buildings and construction of a part two part three storey block comprising two 1 bedroomed flats and eight 2 bedroomed flats and two storey building comprising two 1 bedroomed flats with provision for 12 associated parking spaces Land at and to the rear of 109 Frindsbury Road Strood Rochester ME2 4JD 13 4 MC2007/2219 Hempstead & Wigmore Outline application for demolition of dwelling and construction of two detached chalet bungalows with associated parking 159 Wigmore Road Wigmore Gillingham ME8 0TJ 24 5 MC2008/0413 Luton & Wayfield Change of use of land to provide an extension to the Chatham Golf Driving Range; creation of an earth embankment and boundary fencing Land at Street End Road, Chatham, Kent ME5 0DB 29 6 MC2008/0591 Rochester West Construction of two storey side extension incorporating garage, single storey rear extension and railings around lightwell (demolition of garage and bike store) 4 Roebuck Road Rochester ME1 1UD 45 7 MC2008/0798 Rochester East Increase in roof height to form additional level to accommodate four 1-bedroomed flats with external escape stair case to rear (Resubmission of MC2007/0165) 80-86 John Street, Rochester, Kent ME1 1YW 49 8 MC2008/0890 Strood Rural Change of use from Retail (Class A1) to Cafe (Class A3) 47 Wainscott Road Wainscott Rochester ME2 4LA 54

Page no.

DC0902MW Page 1

9 MC2008/0911 Rochester South & Horsted Construction of a 3-bedroomed detached house Adjacent to 5 Kemp Close Chatham 59 10 MC2008/0973 Rainham Central Construction of a part two/part single storey side/rear extension (demolition of existing garage) 59 Chalfont Drive Rainham Gillingham ME8 9DW 66 11 MC2008/0993 River Retrospective application for raising of land levels OBCU Club 13-15 High Street Brompton Gillingham ME7 5AA 71 BACKGROUND PAPERS The relevant background papers relating to the individual applications comprise: the applications and all supporting documentation submitted therewith; and items identified in any Relevant History and Information section and Representations section with a report. Any information referred to is available for inspection in the Planning Offices of the Council at Gun Wharf, Dock Road, Chatham.

DC0902MW Page 2

1 MC2007/0553

Date Received: 4th April 2007

Location: H M P, Rochester, Kent ME1 3LU

Proposal: Details pursuant to condition 7 (lighting) of planning permission MC2007/0553 for the construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300 additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing

Applicant: Mr Stocks Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for the Home

Department c/o National Offenders Management Service (NOMS) Abell House, John Islip Street London SW1P 4LH

Agent: Ms V Finch Jacobs Ltd 1 City Walk Leeds West Yorkshire LS11 9DX Ward: Rochester West Recommendation - Approval details pursuant to Conditions 7 (lighting) of planning permission MC2007/0553 dated 9th November 2007 The lighting details, submitted under cover of letter dated 17th March 2008 pursuant to Condition 7 of planning permission MC2007/0553, and amended by letters received on 19th May 2008 and 20 June 2008, be Approved. For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see Planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report.

Site Description This submission of details relates to approximately 4 hectares at HMP Borstal covered by application MC2007/0553 for the “construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300 additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing”. The site comprises the secure prison area, enclosed by 5.2 metres high security fencing, together with the surrounding land in ancillary uses: car parking, associated offices, visitors centre, staff mess farm buildings etc. and open land. Construction of buildings, both within the secure prison area and outside is already underway.

DC0902MW Page 3

Background Condition 7 of the planning permission stated that: “No external lighting shall be installed on any part of the development site hereby permitted unless it forms part of a lighting scheme which has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained.” When the application was considered, Members specifically requested that the lighting details be referred back to the Committee for determination. Prior to the submission of these details, a public meeting was held on 4th March 2008 for local residents and Ward Councillors. In addition, the scheme has been the subject of informal discussions with the Council and with a Lighting Consultant acting on behalf of local residents. Proposal As originally submitted, the drawings showed a total of 124 lights; however, this drawing did not include any lights attached to the buildings. The submitted details have now been amended and now include the lights attached to the building; the total number of lights now shown is 219, of which 133 are external and 86 attached to buildings. These details relate only to that part of the prison complex to which the application relates and which are subject to this condition. The different types of light shown are: External lighting

1 Luminaire HQIT – 250w lights on 6 metre high columns to illuminate the car park (11) and the inner road (11);

2 Luminaire HQI-T – 250w lights on 10 metre high masts to illuminate the sports field (4);

3 Luminaire Flat glass– 150w SON P-T lights on 8 metre high columns to illuminate the perimeter fence. These would be positioned approximately 8 metres in from the south-west and part of the north-west perimeter fences (26);

4 Lantern flat glass 50w SON P-T lights on 6 metre high columns to illuminate the road to the south-west of the prison wall and internal roads (31);

5 Thorn piazza 11 70w lights mounted on fence at 4.5 metres above ground level. These lights would be positioned on the south-east and remainder of the north-west perimeter fences and one internal fence and would illuminate the open area of land, within the prison, to the north-east of the new development (44);

6 HQI-T 70w lights mounted on fence at 5 metres above ground level. These lights would illuminate the prison entrance, loading area and exercise yard (6);

Building lights

7 External bulkhead 70w wall mounted lights at 2.2m to staff facilities building (3), visitors’ reception (3), gatehouse (6), visits building (13), and administration (5);

8 External luminaire Pantheon 42w lights mounted at 2.3m to Sports Hall (10);

DC0902MW Page 4

9 Emergency bulkhead lights mounted over doors mounted at 2.1m to staff facilities building (1), visitors’ reception (1), gatehouse (5), visits building (8), healthcare (2), education (4), houseblock 1 (4), houseblock 2 (4), houseblock 3 (4), super houseblock (5), sports changing (2), sports hall (3) and administration (3).

It is also stated on the submitted drawing that the existing fence lighting columns are to be removed. The building lights would operate 24 hours a day. The drawing also shows eight existing columns to be removed.

Relevant Planning History MC2001/2037 Circular 18/84 application for erection of a new 5.2 metre high security

fence around sports field Local Authority objection 1 March 2002 MC2002/0865 Circular 18/84 application for erection of a new 5.2 metre high security

fence around sports field together with a 2.4 metres high boarded timber fence to residential side

Approved 31 December 2003 MC2002/1502 Consultation under Circular 18/84 for installation of 8 security cameras

on 12 metres high columns No objection 29 October 2002 MC2005/1244 Circular 18/84 application for construction of 5.2m high security fencing

to boundary, Approved, 22 August 2005.

MC2006/1952 Construction of 18 x 6 metres high posts with fixed lighting, 5 x 12m high

masts with fixed CCTV cameras Approved 18 December 2006

MC2006/1884 Construction of 100m section of 5.2m high mesh fencing between steel

posts with coiled wire topping; two sets of access gates and four pedestrian gates.

Approved 16 January 2007 MC2007/0553 Construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300

additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing

Approved 9 November 2007 MC2007/2292 Change of use of open space to additional garden land with 2 metre

fencing and gates to the properties 1-28 Sir Evelyn Road, Rochester Approved 14 February 2008

DC0902MW Page 5

Representations Consultation letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of 1a, 1b, 1-28 (consec), Hill View, North View, South View and Harbour View, Sir Evelyn Road; and 1-61 (odd) St. John’s Way. Letters have also been sent to Natural England and the Kent Wildlife Trust 49 letters have been received making the following comments:

• The lighting would have an adverse effect on home life; • There are too many lights; • Fence must be fully clad to stop light spillage and improve security; • Excessive lighting can result in sleep deprivation; • The lighting could impact on bats and insects; • More subtle lighting could be used; • Adverse effect in night skies; • Level of lighting proposed is beyond that required for this category of prison; • Landscaping will not reduce light spillage; • Fast growing trees should be planted; • No lights should face away from the prison; • Excessive number of lights wastes energy and increases carbon footprint; • Excessive lighting will infringe human rights; • Lights should be subject to a sensor system only coming on when required; • If the proposed lighting scheme goes ahead, houses will need blackout blinds. • Lights have been installed which are not shown on the application.

All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans, resulting in a further 42 letters.

• Additional lights would affect quality of life and bats feeding areas; • The additional lights should have been shown at the public meeting and when

the scheme was first submitted and not added later; • No need for this number of lights; • The security fence should be clad to reduce glare and increase security,

reducing the need for this number of lights; • The level of lighting will affect sleep patterns and health; • Lighting should be trialled first before being given consent; • Security cameras should not face towards houses; • Members are asked to visit the site.

Cllr Mark Reckless has written stating that Members should visit the site after dark to see the impact of the lights, the M of J should give an assurance that the level of lighting is the minimum consistent with operational security and the perimeter fence should be clad. An independent lighting consultant has been engaged by the residents to comment on the scheme on their behalf. However, despite requests to both the consultant and the local residents, at the time of the completion of this report, no comments had been received from this consultant.

DC0902MW Page 6

Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Medway Local Plan 2003 Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Neighbour Amenity) Policy BNE5 (Lighting) Planning Appraisal The lighting proposals, submitted pursuant to this condition fall to be assessed under the above-mentioned policies in terms of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the effect on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring and nearby properties. In this context, regard should be paid to both the appearance of the lights and columns themselves and the impact of the lights when illuminated. Local Plan Policy BNE5 states that external lighting schemes should demonstrate that they are the minimum necessary for security, safety and working purposes. Development should seek to minimise the loss of amenity from light glare and spillage, particularly effecting residential areas, areas of nature conservation interest and the landscape qualities of countryside areas. The proposed lighting scheme, both as originally submitted and as amended, has been assessed by the Council’s Street Lighting Engineer. As can be seen from the planning history of the site, there have been several planning applications in the past in relation to fencing, lighting and security cameras. Some of these relate to that part of the prison outside the current application site. Lighting installed under these earlier applications was very strong and has resulted in complaints from local residents. In response to these complaints, this lighting has been switched off and where it relates to the existing prison replaced by Thorn Piazza 11 70w lighting mounted on the fence, similar to that shown under the current proposals. The submitted details show a lighting impact assessment of the site both as existing (i.e. with previously approved lighting switched on) and as proposed. This assessment shows that as existing, a light level of 5 lux would extend towards and effect the rear of 20-23 Sir Evelyn Road and a light level of 2 lux would extend towards and effect 3-9 and 14-28 Sir Evelyn Road and would also effect part of the cricket ground on the north side of the road. Under the proposed scheme, the 5 lux contour would be contained within the enclosed area of the prison with 1 and 2 lux contours overspilling the fence slightly, but not extending more than 5 metres beyond the fence. Essentially there are three potential impacts of lighting: glare, sky glow and light spillage. The submitted details show that light trespass has been minimised under the proposed scheme, especially when compared to the “existing situations”. Glare occurs when light is emitted directly from a source and occurred when the previous lighting was installed. By positioning the lights so that they do not shine directly towards nearby houses and reducing the intensity of lighting, glare can be minimised. The details show that every attempt has been made to position the lights so that they do not shine towards houses.

DC0902MW Page 7

Sky glow occurs where light spills upward. The drawings show that all lights would be capped and would shine downwards, thereby minimising sky glow.

Conclusion and reasons for recommendation of approval of details pursuant to Condition 7 The details are considered to be acceptable in terms of appearance and impact on nearby properties, having regard to operation needs of the establishment and the need to minimise the impact whilst maintaining the required level of security. Accordingly, the details are recommended for approval.

DC0902MW Page 8

2 MC2007/0553

Date Received: 4th April 2007

Location: H M P, Rochester, Kent ME1 3LU Proposal: Details pursuant to condition 3 (landscaping) and 4 (landscape

management) of planning permission MC2007/0553 for the construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300 additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing

Applicant: Mr Stocks Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for the Home

Department c/o National Offenders Management Service (NOMS) Abell House, John Islip Street London SW1P 4LH

Agent: Ms V Finch Jacobs Ltd 1 City Walk Leeds West Yorkshire LS11 9DX Ward: Rochester West Recommendation - Approval details pursuant to Conditions 3 (landscaping) and 4 (landscape maintenance) of planning permission MC2007/0553 dated 9th November 2007 The revised landscaping details, submitted under cover of letter dated 4th June 2008 pursuant to Conditions 3 and 4 of planning permission MC2007/0553, and amended by letter received on 20th June 2008, be Approved. For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see Planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report.

Site Description and background These aspects have been set out on the preceding item on this agenda relating to the lighting details Proposal Details were first submitted on 12 March 2008 with minor revisions received on 28 March 2008. To address issues raised following consultation with residents on the first scheme, a further revision has now been received. The submitted details identify 4 areas to be landscaped:

1 Triangular area to rear of St. John’s Way show an area of rough grass to be retained for bat habitat, a meadow to be seeded with wild flower seed and a 2m high bund. To be planted with 1,263 trees and 3,750 shrubs, plus quickthorn hedge. Small area at NW corner of prison by junction to be planted with climbers.

DC0902MW Page 9

This area is the only part to be amended, under the latest proposals which show 16 x 7-8 metres high and 2 x 5-6 metres high Austrian Pine trees.

2 Triangular area to rear of 1-22 Sir Evelyn Road show an area of lawn grass with a mown grass path. A 1m high (10m wide) earth bund along southern boundary to prison wall to be provided and planted with pedunculatte oak, ash, hazel, field maple, horn beam, bullace plum and taxus baccata. An orchard with 14 fruit trees to be planted to rear of 23-28 Sir Evelyn Road.

3 Area of structured planting along south-west boundary to site, along top of ridge overlooking Nashenden Valley. Area of structured planting (1,610 sq. m.) with 438 trees and 1,284 shrubs. Existing trees to be retained and bat boxes added. Wild flower mix to be planted on grass areas.

4 Continuation of area 3 with another structure planting zone to rear of new reception and staff buildings and car park. 1,312 sq. m. with 287 trees and 1,061 shrubs. There will also be some planting within the proposed car park and additional planting on grassed areas. Again, bat boxes to be added to existing trees.

Relevant Planning History MC2007/0553 Construction of five 2-storey accommodation blocks to create 300

additional prison places with ancillary buildings (sports centre, training and education facilities, extensions to existing kitchen and segregation facilities), additional car parking and reception facilities, security lighting and fencing

Approved 9 November 2007 MC2007/2292 Change of use of open space to additional garden land with 2 metre

fencing and gates to the properties 1-28 Sir Evelyn Road, Rochester Approved 14 February 2008 Representations Consultation letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of 1a, 1b, 1-28 (consec), Hill View, North View, South View and Harbour View, Sir Evelyn Road; and 1-61 (odd) St. John’s Way. Letters have also been sent to Natural England and Kent Wildlife Trust. Kent Wildlife Trust has written supporting the proposals and welcoming the focus on habitat creation and biodiversity enhancement. Natural England has no comment. 18 letters have been received from residents of Sir Evelyn Road supporting the landscaping proposals and making the following comments:

• The tree planting will provide a screen that will soften the impact of the prison buildings;

• The meadow garden will encourage wildlife and give something back to the community;

• The area should be a dog free zone to encourage children; • The work should be done as soon as possible.

5 e-mails have been received from residents of 3 properties in St. John’s Way making the following comments:

DC0902MW Page 10

• Ash trees lose their leaves in winter and the proposed planning is of insufficient

height to provide any sort of screen; • Either evergreen trees should be planted or the fence height raised; • There should be strong provision for maintenance; • Windows from buildings overlook the rear of houses in St. John’s Way and

even with landscaping there would be no privacy; • The land has always been fenced and private. If the area becomes open it

could attract anti-social behaviour. The land should remain fenced. All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans resulting in 19 letters objecting to the revised landscaping proposals on the following grounds:

• The intended re-instatement of the ‘L3’ land on the south-west side of the prison falls short due to the use of inappropriate materials and is not being restored to its original condition;

• There is limited data on how bats respond to the change in habitat and foraging around;

• The loss of the bat foraging ground; • The original earth should have been stockpiled and used; • The landscaping and mitigation works are behind schedule; • The landscaping work already carried out is not being properly watered or

maintained; • The works have done nothing to soften the impact of the prison; • The visual mitigation is ineffective and the whole site should be clad; • The larger trees only provide partial screening and do not benefit all properties; • Waiting 10 years for adequate screening to be established would affect

properties; • Residents in St. John’s Way have not been given land to extend their gardens

(as have residents in Sir Evelyn Road); Development Plan Policies Medway Local Plan 2003 Policy BNE6 (Landscape Design) Planning Appraisal Landscape assessment Assessing each element of the scheme in turn: Rear of St. John’s Way Substantial planting on top of a 2m high bund would provide a substantial screen which, when established would significantly soften, but would not necessarily totally screen the development. The scheme has been enhanced by additional planting as shown on the revised plans, particularly the Austrian Pines. This part of the scheme is important in view of the proximity of the proposed accommodation block to the houses in St. John’s Way. The proposed planting falls short of leylandii, suggested by some residents which would, if

DC0902MW Page 11

established, totally block out any views of the development, but would also block out existing views, restrict light and be out of character with native planting. Rear of Sir Evelyn Road The scheme will provide bunding and planting which will considerably soften the impact of both the proposed development and the existing prison buildings and wall. Planting will also enhance appearance of the area of land and turn it into a valuable amenity. Regular maintenance, watering and weeding is essential. Planting along south-west boundary Shown as two areas on submitted drawings. Substantial planting along top of ridge would improve screening. Currently, prison buildings are visible from several locations in Medway Valley. Also planting within proposed car park and existing grassed areas will enhance appearance of this side of the prison.

L3 land This area is not part of the landscaping scheme. It was partly excavated to allow construction vehicles to access the site. Condition 11 of MC2007/0553 requires this area to be re-instated. Contractors acting on behalf of the applicants have placed soil on this land. The Ministry of Justice has written to advising that they have raised this their concerns with the contractor in the strongest manner and the works will be completed by Friday 22nd August 2008. In response to the concerns raised by local residents regarding the L3 land, the applicants’ agent advises that this will be restored to its original condition following completion of building works.

Conclusion and reasons for recommendation of approval of details pursuant to Conditions 3 and 4 The landscaping proposals are considered to be acceptable. The species are considered to be acceptable and the planting would enhance the appearance of the locality and soften the impact of the development, increasingly so as the planting becomes established. Accordingly, the details are recommended for approval.

DC0902MW Page 12

3 MC2007/1498

Date Received: 20th August 2007

Location: Land at and to the rear of 109 Frindsbury Road Strood Rochester

ME2 4JD Proposal: Demolition of buildings and construction of a part two part three

storey block comprising two 1 bedroomed flats and eight 2 bedroomed flats and two storey building comprising two 1 bedroomed flats with provision for 12 associated parking spaces

Applicant: Abbey Group Ltd Abbey House 12 Southgate Road Potters Bar

EN6 5DU Agent: Mr B Rea Hall Needham Associates Kille House Chinnor Road

Thame Oxon OX9 3NU Ward: Strood North Recommendation - Approval subject to:- (and as amended by revised drawings received on 20th March 2008)

A. The applicant entering into an agreement under the terms of S106 of the Town & Country Planning Act to secure a contribution of £17,940 towards the provision of play facilities, informal open space and sports provisions in the vicinity of the site.

B. The imposition of the following conditions:- 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

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 any part of the buildings are occupied and shall thereafter be retained. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 Details and samples of any materials to be used externally and any means of

enclosure shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape

works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include existing and proposed finished levels of contours; means of enclosure, hard surfacing materials; minor artifacts and structures (e.g. refuse or other

DC0902MW Page 13

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). 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 No development shall take place until a schedule of landscape maintenance for a

minimum period of five years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

6 Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted an investigation shall

be undertaken to determine the nature and extent of any contamination. The results of the investigation together with a risk assessment by a competent person and details of a scheme to contain, treat or remove any contamination as appropriate, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. 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 and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

7 Before the development hereby permitted commences, a scheme for protecting the

proposed flats from road traffic noise shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All works which form part of the approved scheme shall be completed before any part of the development is occupied and shall thereafter be retained.

8 Prior to the commencement of development full details of the proposed cycle store

and bin stores shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle store and bin store shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of any part of the development and shall thereafter by retained.

9 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking, turning, secure

cycle storage and bin storage 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 these reserved parking spaces.

10 Prior to the commencement of the development details of existing and proposed

levels and cross section through this site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

DC0902MW Page 14

11 Prior to the commencement of the development details of foul and surface water drainage to serve the development, including flats, outbuilding and parking areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be installed prior to the occupation of any part of the development and thereafter retained.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see Planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report. Site Description The application relates to 109 Frindsbury Road, which is a two storey property located on the north-western side of the road. The property appears to have a retail use at ground level (currently vacant) with residential above. In addition, the application site includes a 4 metres wide vehicular access leading to a rear yard used for plant hire. The site has a frontage to Frindsbury Road of approx. 10 metres, although it widens to the rear of the adjoining properties (105-107 Frindsbury Road) to approx. 21 metres; it has a depth of approx. 57 metres. Frindsbury Road rises from the south-west towards the north-east. 105-107 Frindsbury Road is also two storey and is reflective of the design of No.109. This property is also in retail use on the ground floor (used by the plant hire company) with what appears to be offices above. The plant hire yard measures approx. 50 metres in depth by 21 metres in width. Within this area is a large flat roof building that occupies the whole of the northern side of the yard. Generally, the land rises sharply from Frindsbury Road towards the north and this results in the key characteristic of the site, which is that the area subject to this application is substantially lower than the adjoining land and properties on the north, east and west boundaries. The ground level rises sharply from Frindsbury Road and the adjoining land and properties are some 5 metres higher than the application site. Large retaining walls form the boundary of the site. Immediately to the east of the application site, there is a public footpath that runs from Frindsbury Road to Powlett Road. Next to this footpath, there is a relatively recent development of six flats, known as Christian Court. The properties located on the western boundary of the site (Mayfair) are two storey terraced houses dating before 1947. These properties all have single storey rear projections, which would have formed part of the original house, and small rear garden areas. There is an access to the rear garden areas that runs along the top of the boundary wall on the western side of the site. The boundaries of these properties are a mix of fencing and walls ranging in height up 1.8 metres. The properties located to the northern side of the site (Basi Close) are more modern two storey properties also raised above the development site. There is a large tree on the north-eastern side of the boundary. The public footpath between Frindsbury Road and Basi Close runs along the eastern boundary of the site and beyond this to the east are the rear garden to the properties in Powlett Road and Frindsbury Road. These properties are all two storeys in height.

DC0902MW Page 15

Proposal This application seeks full planning permission for a total of 12 flats in two buildings and follows the refusal of planning permission for a four storey block of flats on 5 October 2005 under reference MC2004/1722. That scheme comprised a total of 11 flats (8 x 2 bed flats and 3 x one bed flats). The current proposal involves the demolition of all buildings on site, including the frontage building. The frontage building would be replaced by a two storey building comprising 2 x one bedroom flats (one on each floor). This building would be narrower than the existing building, enabling the vehicular access to be widened to 4.1 metres The main part of the development would comprise a part two storey/part three storey building located towards the rear of the site. This building would house 10 flats (8 x two flats and 2 x one bedroom), each of the ground and first floors containing 3 x two bedroom flats and 1 x one bedroom flats, with 2 x two bedroom flats on the top floor. The flat block has been designed so that it breaks down into 4 elements, each with its own roof. This would take the form of 4 hipped roofs; on the two storey parts, the ridge would run from north to south, whilst on the three storey parts, the building would be turned through 90 degrees so that the ridge runs from east to west. Part of the third storey would be accommodated within the roofspace, resulting in the provision of dormers in the front (south facing) and rear (north facing) elevations to each of these elements. Due to the difference in levels between the application site and surrounding land to the west, north and east, the first floor windows of the proposed flats would be at the level of the adjoining footpath and gardens. It is submitted that the frontage building would be constructed in bricks with a rendered panel on the front elevation and concrete roof tiles. The rear building would also be constructed in bricks with concrete roof tiles. Juliet balconies would be introduced on some of the south facing windows and on one east facing window at first floor level. 12 car parking spaces are shown to the rear of the frontage buildings and in front of the proposed flat block (1:1 provision). In addition, a separate building comprising bicycle store (4 cycles) and bin store is shown. This structure would be screened by a 0.9m high post and rail fence. A footpath along the eastern side of the block provides access to the rear flats. Three courtyard/garden areas are shown to the sides/rear of the block. Traffic calming measures are proposed in the vehicular access, which would also serve a parking area at the rear of 107 & 109 Frindsbury Road. Ground levels have not been detailed on any of the submitted plans. However, the elevations show the retaining walls on the eastern and western boundaries to be approximately 5 metres in height. The building is designed so as to maximise the use of the roof space on two elements, whilst attempting to minimise the impact on neighbouring properties in Mayfair. This results in differing ridge and eaves levels throughout the development. The submitted plans show that the three storey elements of the proposed building would have two ridge heights of approx 10.2 metres above ground level (one at approx 5.8 metres above the top of the retaining wall and the other at approx 5 metres above the retaining wall). The ridge of the two storey elements would be approx 8.2 metres above ground level (approx 4.7 metres and 3.4 metres above the retaining wall). This compares to a ridge height of approx 13.2 metres under the previously refused scheme. In terms of the front elevation of the building to eaves

DC0902MW Page 16

height would measure approx 5.5 metres in respect of the two storey element, rising to approx 7.2 metres for the three storey element. The eaves to the rear elevation would also rise to approx 7.2 metres in height above ground level. All four elevations contain habitable room windows at ground and first floor levels, whilst the second floor flats only have windows in the south (front) and north (rear) facing elevations. Site Area/Density Site Area: 0.09 Hectare (0.245 Acre) Density: 110 d. p. h. (45 d.p.a.) Relevant Planning History MC2004/1722 Demolition of buildings and construction of a four storey block of one and

two bedroom flats with parking. Refused 5 October 2005 MC2005/2374 Change of use to residential Approved 31 May 2006 Representations The application has been advertised by means of a site notice and advertisement in the local press. Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of: 6-19 (inclusive) Mayfair; 5-25 (odds) and 32 Powlett Street; 103, 105, 107, 113; and 115 Frindsbury Road; Flats 1-6 (Inclusive) Christian Court; and 1-7 (Inclusive) Basi Close. Additionally consultation has been sent to the Frindsbury and Wainscott Residents Association, Southern Water, The Environment Agency, Seeboard; and Transco. Southern Water has written advising that it can provide foul sewage disposal to serve the proposed development, although a formal application for connection will need to be made and an appropriate informative should be attached to any planning permission. It is recommended that the storm water flow should be connected to soakaways and a condition to this effect should be attached to any planning permission. Frindsbury and Wainscott Community Association has the following reservations about the proposed development:

• The number of dwellings proposed is excessive; • Access onto the busy A228 appears restricted and is close to a pedestrian

crossing; • One parking space for a two bedroom property is inadequate and there is no space

for parking on surrounding streets; • The visual impact on the surrounding area, particularly Mayfair, raises a concern; • There is limited landscaping which could be the result of overdevelopment.

6 letters have been received from local residents raising the following concerns and objections:

• Three storey buildings would be out of character in an area of predominantly two storey buildings;

DC0902MW Page 17

• Proposal would have adverse impact on the rear of the dwellings in Mayfair in terms of overlooking;

• Twelve parking spaces are inadequate and parking will overspill onto surrounding roads, which are already under pressure exacerbating parking problems in the area;

• Proposal would generate additional traffic onto a main road close to a pedestrian crossing;

• There is insufficient space for refuse lorries • Refuse bins may have to be placed beside the road which could be a hazard; • The impact of the development on the banks has not been shown; • Proposal would affect the tree, which it is proposed to retain; • Cycle parking is a meaningless gesture as no-one would cycle in Frindsbury; • The access to the site should be wider; • Nothing has changed since previous application was refused.

The Environment Agency has reiterated its comments on the previous application which stated that they have no objections to the proposal. They advise “The site lies within Source Protection Zone 2 of the public water supply abstraction. A source Protection Zone (SPZ) is the area over which recharge is captured by an abstraction borehole. SPZ’s are designated by the Environment Agency and are delineated to protect potable water supplies against the polluting effects of human activity. Potable supplies are therefore at risk from activities at the site and all precautions should be taken to avoid discharge and spillage to the ground during construction and subsequent operation.

Care should also be taken in the design of any soakaways, and the earliest contact should be made with the Agency’s Groundwater and Contaminated Land Department” All consultees and objectors have been notified of the receipt of revised plans and a further 5 letters (including one from the Frindsbury and Wainscott Community Association) have been received re-iterating the previous objections. Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy QL11 (Protection of Existing Community Services) Policy TP19 (Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan 2003:

Policy S6 (Planning Obligations) Policy BNE1 (General Principals for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE23 (Contaminated Land) Policy ED3 (Other Employment Sites) Policy H4 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy H5 (High Density Housing)

DC0902MW Page 18

Policy L4 (Provision of Open Space in New Residential Developments) Policy T1 (Impact of Development) Policy T2 (Access to the Highway) Policy T13 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal Principle of development The site is occupied by a Plant Hire company and used for storage of their equipment. It also has a repairs workshop at the rear and a retail unit which fronts onto the Frindsbury Road. The loss of an existing employment use and retail unit is a material planning consideration in the determination of this application. The site is not allocated as an existing employment site under Policy ED1 of the Local Plan. The application, therefore, falls for consideration under Policy ED3 of the Local Plan that relates to employment sites not specifically identified. This policy allows for the alteration, extension or replacement of existing premises for employment use where they are not detrimental to local amenity. The preamble to this policy at paragraph 4.5.5 states that where sites, which by reason of their age, impact on local amenity, physical constraints, or poor infrastructure are less suited to modern employment use and providing a suitable alternative site can be found to relocate existing firms, it would be appropriate to consider the redevelopment for other uses to facilitate an improvement to local amenity and the environment of the area. The Local Plan states that within the urban area the preferred reuse of such sites would be residential. The applicant’s agent advises that no decision has been made to re-locate the plant hire operation. Should this be necessary then every effort would be made to re-locate in the locality. Under the previously refused scheme, the existing shop was retained and no objection was raised in regard to the loss of a retail facility. The current proposal would result in the loss of a shop within a local centre, as identified under Policy R10 of the Local Plan. However, planning permission has already been granted for a change of use to residential under reference MC2005/2374 and therefore, no objection can be raised on account of the loss of a retail facility. In conjunction with Policy ED3 of the adopted Local Plan, the proposal also falls for consideration under Policy H4 of the Local Plan which supports the principle of housing development consisting of the use of vacant or derelict land or the redevelopment of existing buildings no longer required for non-residential use. The redevelopment of this site for housing could have significant benefits in terms of the impact on the area generally. When assessed against the criteria in both Policies ED3 and H4 and the reasoned justification (i.e. age, amenity, physical constraints, poor infrastructure, suitability for modern employment use, vacant or derelict land, market demand for employment, appropriateness of location and the identification of alternative sites) it is considered that the loss of the employment use of the rear portion of this site would be outweighed by the benefits gained by redevelopment for housing under policy H4. This being the case, the general principle for the redevelopment of this land is considered to be acceptable.

DC0902MW Page 19

The density of the proposed development at 110 d. p. h. (45 d.p.a.) is considered to be acceptable in this location having regard to the surrounding development, including the neighbouring flat block (Christian Court) and the site’s relatively close proximity to Strood Town Centre, local shopping facilities and public transport – Frindsbury Road being a bus route with stops nearby. The proposal would, therefore, comply with Policy H5 of the Local Plan. Design, appearance and character. The previous application was refused on the grounds that:

“The proposed development by virtue of its siting, mass, bulk, height and design will result in an unacceptable loss of amenity to the occupiers of adjoining residential properties, especially in Mayfair, by virtue of loss of outlook and direct overlooking, which they could reasonably expect to be able to continue to enjoy. The development would therefore be unacceptable in terms of Policy ENV15 of the Kent Structure Plan 1996, Policies BNE1 and BNE2 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and Policies QL1 and QL5 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan (Deposit Version) 2003.”

That application showed a three storey building, with additional accommodation in the roofspace, located centrally within the site and close to the 5 metres high retaining walls on the eastern and western boundaries of the site. That application also showed the retention of the frontage building. The current proposal, in an attempt to address the ground of refusal, has reduced the height of the main building to two and a half storeys with the upper floor, partly within the roofspace. Although this has reduced the height of the proposed building, it has resulted in the development being more spread out and the amenity area broken up. The applicant’s agent has written advising that this is the result of an attempt to address the earlier scheme’s height, mass and bulk and allows the creation of smaller and more intimate spaces. There are two elements of the current proposal which need to be addressed in design terms. Firstly, the design of the proposed new frontage building. This building retains the simple form of the existing building, albeit on a slightly smaller scale to allow for the widening of the access. In design terms this is acceptable, maintaining the character of the street scene, but with the use of appropriate materials enhancing the appearance of the site. The second element relates to the main building. This building, whilst more spread out than the previously proposed building, would be less dominant and being to the rear of the site, behind existing and proposed development, and below the surrounding ground level, would have little impact on the street scene. Accordingly, in terms of design and the impact on the street scene, the proposal is acceptable and would be in accordance with Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE1 of the Local Plan. Amenity considerations The ground of refusal for the previous application also related to the impact on adjoining residential properties in Mayfair and the potential loss of privacy and outlook that would result. The current proposal seeks to address this by reducing the height, spreading the bulk, moving parts of the building further away from the boundary and reducing the number of windows facing towards Mayfair.

DC0902MW Page 20

The result is that those windows still facing towards Mayfair are at ground level and therefore, the potential for overlooking is very limited given the difference in the ground level between the application site and the neighbouring properties to the North, East and West. Due to the reduced height of the proposed building and the relative levels of the application site and Mayfair, the proposed building would have the appearance of a predominantly single storey building when viewed from Mayfair. In this context it is considered that the current proposal addresses the previously raised concerns in terms of privacy and outlook. Like the previous scheme, the current proposal has been assessed in terms of the Building Research Establishments (BRE) daylight/sunlight indicators. When the previous scheme was considered, it was acknowledged that some loss of daylight would occur in the early hours of the morning, but this would be gone by 10.00 am and a robust case for a refusal on the grounds of loss of daylight/overshadowing could not be justified. With the reduction in the height of the proposed building compared to that previously considered, the potential light loss under the current proposal would be even less significant. The issue of outlook for the occupiers of the proposed flats also needs to be addressed bearing in mind that the proposed development would be set within an area of excavated land below the prevailing ground level. Whilst this could easily result in the occupiers of the proposed flats, particularly on the ground floor looking out on retaining walls, the proposed layout of the development has resulted in the provision of small patio/garden areas which would be overlooked by these flats. The scheme has been designed so that the main habitable room windows overlook these areas and do not look out onto the retaining walls. Having regard to all of the above, it is considered that the current proposal addresses the previously raised concerns in respect of loss of outlook and overlooking and accordingly, no objection is raised in this regard under Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE2 of the Local Plan. Highway and parking considerations The Transport Statement, submitted as part of the application, calculates that the proposed development would generate two vehicle movements in the morning peak and one in the evening peak. This data is considered to be an under assessment and two vehicle movements are also likely to occur in the evening peak. The TRICS database suggests that a total of 27 vehicle movements is likely over the course of a day, marginally higher than the 20 predicted by the Transport Statement. The applicant states that the existing plant hire use of the site generates 4 movements during the morning peak. It would, however, seem reasonable to assume that a similar or higher number of trips would be generated by this use when compared to a residential development. There are no recorded road traffic accidents in the vicinity of the access, and no indication that the proximity of the access to the pelican crossing has caused any safety issues. Although it is likely that the access will be less intensively used, it is proposed to make improvements by widening the access to 4.1 metres. This will allow two medium sized cars to pass at slow speed. The surfacing work proposed at the point of access where the footway is interrupted will provide pedestrians with adequate warning of the access, a significant improvement over the current situation. There is good visibility to west, and visibility to the east, at 41 metres is marginally higher than that considered under the previous application. This is based upon a set-back of 2m from the edge of road, an appropriate distance for a relatively small development. There is an element of balance in determining the acceptability

DC0902MW Page 21

of this sightline. Manual for Streets indicates that a sightline of 43 metres is appropriate for a road where speeds are around 30 mph. Whilst the proposed sightline is marginally below this, it is considered that having regard to the existing use of the site, the absence of any accidents at this location, improvements to the width of the access and the provision of speed restraint measures on the access road, there are suitable mitigation measures, and therefore the proposed access is considered to accord with Policies T1 and T2 of the Local Plan. Parking is to be provided at one space per unit. Given the central location of the site in close proximity to public transport and the town centre, this level of parking is considered to be acceptable and accordingly, the proposal is acceptable, under Policy TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policy T13 of the Local Plan. Education and open space provision Policy S6 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 enables the Council to seek developer contributions towards the provision of infrastructure, social, recreational and community facilities where a need for these would arise from a proposed development. This Policy is now supplemented by the Council’s Developer Contributions Guide which was adopted on 4 May 2008, although, in the case of this application, the contributions were agreed with the applicant’s agent prior to the adoption of this document. In the case of this application, as only 8 x two bedroom flats are proposed no contribution is sought in relation to educational facilities. However, the Council’s Greenspace Services would be seeking a contribution towards the provision of play facilities, informal open space and formal sports provision. The occupancy ratios, which are applied for the provision of such facilities, as specified in the Local Plan, are 1.33 persons for one bedroom units and 2.44 persons for two bedroom units. Applying these ratios to the proposal would result in the 4 x one bedroom flats being occupied by 5 persons and the 8 two bedroom flats being occupied by 20 persons. The contributions sought (per person) are £152 per head for equipped play space, £109 per head for informal open space and £487 (per head) for formal sports facilities. No contributions are sought for play facilities in respect of one bedroom units. The proposed development would, therefore result in a requirement for a contribution of £2,980 (£596 per head) in respect of the one bedroom units and a contribution of £14,960 (£748 per head) for the two bedroom units, making a total of £17,940. The applicants agent confirmed that his clients are willing to pay such a contribution as well as any reasonable legal and monitoring Officers costs for officer time in connection with any legal agreement prepared under Section 106 of the town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as Amended) related to the proposal. Conclusion and reason for recommendation of approval It is considered that the current proposal addresses the grounds of refusal which applied to the previously application and is acceptable in terms of principle, employment and retail policies, appearance, neighbour amenity, parking and infrastructure contributions. The proposal therefore accords with the provisions of Policies QL1, QL11 and TP19 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policies S6, BNE1, BNE2, BNE23, ED3, H4, H5, L4, T1, T2 and T13 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and the application is accordingly recommended for approval.

DC0902MW Page 22

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 expressing views contrary to the recommendation. [This application was considered by Members at the Development Control Committee on the 2nd July 2008, when it was determined to defer a decision to enable a Members’ site visit to be held.]

DC0902MW Page 23

4 MC2007/2219

Date Received: 10th December 2007

Location: 159 Wigmore Road Wigmore Gillingham ME8 0TJ Proposal: Outline application for demolition of dwelling and construction of two

detached chalet bungalows with associated parking Applicant: Mrs J Dickson 159 Wigmore Road Gillingham Kent ME8 0TJ Agent: Mr R A Clayton 32 Watling Street Gillingham Kent ME7 2YH Ward: Hempstead & Wigmore Recommendation - Approval with Conditions (and as amended by revised Design & Access Statement, Planning Statement and drawing no. 07.11.03/2 received 9th June 2008) 1 Approval of the details of layout, scale, siting, appearance, access and

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 to which this permission relates must be begun no later than the

expiration of 2 years from the final approval of the reserved matters or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

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 any building is occupied and shall thereafter be retained. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

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 tree;

DC0902MW Page 24

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 8m 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 details to be submitted pursuant to Condition 1 shall show pedestrian vision

splays of 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres on both sides of the vehicular access points with no obstruction of sight more than 0.6 metres above carriageway level within the splays thereafter. The pedestrian vision splays will be provided in accordance with those details as finally approved prior to the first occupation of any part of the development and thereafter maintained.

7 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 or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to the reserved vehicle parking areas.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see Planning Appraisal section and conclusion at the end of this report.

Site Description 159 Wigmore Road is a detached bungalow on the east side of the road, set back approx. 17 metres from the highway. There is a flat roof double garage to the side of the bungalow, occupying the same building line. This garage is separate from the main bungalow, but attached to a single storey flat roofed rear extension. There are several trees on the site, including an oak tree on the southern boundary which is protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The plot is large with a frontage of 25 metres and a depth of over 60 metres. There is a glasshouse and a shed in the rear garden which is over 30 metres deep. Wigmore Road contains a variety of dwellings. The immediately adjoining property to the north (157 Wigmore Road) is also a detached bungalow set back the same distance as the application property. The neighbouring property to the south (161 Wigmore Road) stands

DC0902MW Page 25

forward of the application property, being only 9 metres back from the highway. To the rear of the site is a playing field. Proposal The proposal, as originally submitted was to demolish the bungalow and double garage and to divide the site into separated plots to enable the building of three detached chalet bungalows. Following the Committee decision on 21 May 2008 to defer the application to seek a reduction in the number of units, a revised drawing has been submitted showing two bungalows. The application is in outline form with all matters (layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) reserved for the future consideration. The revised drawing shows two plots, measuring 11.5 and 13 metres wide respectively by the existing depth (approximately 62 metres). Each dwelling would measure 6.8 metres wide by 16 metres in depth. The drawing shows that the accommodation within each dwelling would comprise an entrance hall and bedroom at the front of the ground floor, with a kitchen, stairway and study behind and a sitting room to the rear. The first floor would comprise three bedrooms, a landing and bathroom. Under the revised scheme there would be a detached private garage to serve each dwelling. Site Area/Density Site area: 0.15 ha (0.37 acre) Proposed site density 13.3 d.p.h. (5.4 d.p.a.) Relevant Planning History MC2006/0259 Change of use from residential to place of worship

Withdrawn Representations The application has been advertised on site and neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of 155, 157, 161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 168, Wigmore Road. 4 letters have been received objecting on the grounds of:

• The proposal would result in a cramped form of development out of character with its surroundings;

• Loss of light to neighbouring property; • Overlooking/loss of privacy; • Loss of outlook; • Two parking spaces per dwelling is inadequate for four bedroom properties; • The parking arrangements, as shown, are likely to lead to an increase in on

street parking and congestion; • Vehicles reversing out of the parking spaces onto Wigmore Road would be a

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

DC0902MW Page 26

Development Plan Policies Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE43 (Trees on Development sites) Policy H4 (Housing in Urban Areas) Policy T13 (Parking Standards) Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards) Planning Appraisal This is an outline application, with all matters reserved for future consideration. This being the case, consideration in respect of this proposal are limited to matters of principle including general issues related to density, amenity, trees; and highway matters. The principle of the development The application is for residential development within the urban area, where the surrounding development is entirely residential. Policy H4 of the Local Plan supports the principle of the redevelopment of sites such as this, providing that a clear improvement to the local environment will result. Density The site is within an urban area of moderate to low density housing, comprising predominantly detached and semi-detached houses and bungalows with large gardens. The existing site density at 6.6 d.p.h. (2.6 d.p.a.) is extremely low and the proposed site density at 13.3 d.p.h. (5.4 d.p.a.) is still regarded as low, when considering current Government Policy as contained in PPS3 ‘Housing’. However, having regard to the general character of the locality, no objection can be raised in terms of the density proposed and inefficient use of land. Design and appearance, and the character of the area As the application is in outline form matters of design and appearance would fall to be assessed under Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE1 of the Local Plan at the reserved matters stage. Notwithstanding this it is considered that two properties can be designed for this site in a manner that would respect and enhance the character of the street scene. Amenity considerations The illustrative drawing shows that the proposed bungalows would be staggered so that the bungalow on Plot 1 would project approximately 2 metres in front of 161 Wigmore Road, whilst the bungalow on Plot 2 would project approximately 3 metres in front of 157 Wigmore Road. Neither of these bungalows would project further than the neighbouring dwellings, to

DC0902MW Page 27

the rear. There would, therefore be no adverse impact on neighbouring properties in terms of light loss to front or rear windows. There are no main windows on the side elevations of either property that would be affected. The illustrative drawing shows sitting room and kitchen windows on the south facing side elevations and study and utility room windows on the north facing side elevations. At first floor level the drawing shows a bedroom window on the south facing elevation and a landing window on the north facing elevation. There is potential for overlooking both from and to these windows and if this was a full application an objection may be raised in this regard. However, as the application is in outline form, such matter could be addressed at the reserved matters stage. The applicant’s agent is aware of this concern and of the need to address it when, in the event of planning permission being granted, a reserved matters application is submitted. The reduction in the number of units and the moving of the bungalow on Plot 1 further from the site boundary potential reduces this concern. Nevertheless, if members are minded to approve this application it would be appropriate to include an informative to draw attention to this potential area of concern. Accordingly, no objection is raised in this regard under Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE2 of the Local Plan. Trees There are several trees on the site, one of which, an oak tree on the boundary to 161 Wigmore Road, is protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The stem of the tree is set back 27 metres from the highway, but is still visible, and 4.5m from the side of the flat roofed extension; the crown of that tree spreads over that roof. At its closest point the corner of the proposed bungalow on Plot 1 would be approximately 7 metres from the stem. An area of permeable paving would be provided to the rear of the bungalow coming to within 4.5 metres of the stem. The application demonstrates that every effort will be made to protect this tree and accordingly, no objection is raised under Policy BNE45 of the Local Plan. Highways/parking The illustrative drawing shows space for two cars per dwelling, one in a detached garage and one in front of the detached garage. The adopted vehicle parking standards require the provision of up to two spaces per dwelling in this location. Accordingly, no objection is raised in terms of parking under the provisions of Policy TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policy T13 of the Local Plan in terms of parking.

Conclusion and reasons for recommendation of approval The application is considered to be acceptable in terms of broad principle, with details of siting, appearance, scale, access and landscaping reserved for future consideration. Accordingly this outline application is recommended for approval. This application would normally fall to be considered under the officer’s delegated powers but is being reported for Members’ consideration because number of representations received contrary to the Officers’ recommendation. [The application was considered by Members at the Development Control Committee on the 21st May 2008 when it was determined to defer a decision for further negotiation].

DC0902MW Page 28

5 MC2008/0413

Date Received: 10th March 2008

Location: Land at Street End Road, Chatham, Kent ME5 0DB Proposal: Change of use of land to provide an extension to the Chatham Golf

Driving Range; creation of an earth embankment and boundary fencing

Applicant: Mr R Colton Chatham Golf Driving Range Ltd C/o HBJ Gately

Wareing LLP 15 Houndsditch London EC3A 7BR Agent: Mr N Gibbens Rural Arisings Ltd 132 Farley Road Selsdon Surrey

CR2 7NF Ward: Luton & Wayfield Recommendation - Approval with Conditions (and as amended by plans received 19th June 2008 and information photos received 4th July 2008) 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. 2 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 proposed finished levels of contours including earthworks; means of enclosure including fencing and gating, vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials. Details of the reinforced soil embankment construction and planting shall be submitted and carried out in accordance with BS EN 14475:2006 Execution of special geotechnical works. Reinforced Fill; and BS 8006 (1995) Code of practice for strengthened / reinforced soil and other fill. Details of the vegetation, with reference to the CIRIA Publication C 708 (2007) Use of vegetation in civil engineering, must be submitted. 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.

3 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 a 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 planting 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.

DC0902MW Page 29

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

5 In this Condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in

accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs a) and b) below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the date of occupation of the building for its permitted use.

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

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

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

6 No development shall take place until full details and method of stabilising and

controlling soil erosion and details of the earthworks have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include the proposed grading and mounding of land areas including the levels and contours to be formed, showing the relationship of proposed mounding to existing vegetation and surrounding landform. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

7 No development shall take place until details of 'Code of Construction Practice' has

been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The code will be provide details of the temporary construction access, the provision of adequate on-site turning facilities for delivery vehicles as well as the wheel-washing facilities, road-cleaning proposals and dust suppression facilities.

8 Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the disposal of foul and

surface waters shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All on site drainage shall be in complete accordance with these approved details.

DC0902MW Page 30

9 Prior to the commencement of the land raising works and the creation of the earth embankment hereby permitted, full details of the type of types of fill material to be used in association with these works including a chemical analysis shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter only materials approved for this purpose pursuant to the requirements of this Condition shall be used in association with the land raising works hereby approved.

10 Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the measures to protect

the public sewers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. All measures shall be in complete accordance with these approved details.

11 Prior to the commencement of any development works, a site investigation shall be

undertaken to determine whether any protected species such as slow worms, newts, dormice, common lizards or bats (including their roosts/habitats) are on site. No development or other work at the site shall take place until the results of the survey investigation and any mitigation measures and timescales for there implementation required to safeguard any identified species on site (as well as their roosts/habitats) from the proposed development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures shall be undertaken in their entirety within the timescales set out in the approved document.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report.

Site Description This application relates to the Chatham Golf driving range, adjacent to Street End Road and the adjacent allotment site accessed from Second Avenue (geographically adjacent to Street End Road). The allotment site is situated at the end of a cul-de-sac road that serves an industrial estate. Further to the south on Street End Road are dwellings, some of which are at a higher ground level and over looking the allotments. Directly opposite the golf driving range are dwellings that are elevated above Street End Road. The allotment area is enclosed by a 1.8 metre high chain link fence, whilst the golf driving range is enclosed by 3 metre high perimeter fencing adjacent to Street End Road. In-between the allotments and the golf driving range is an area of open land with a large tree and some bushes. The boundary with the lower level allotments comprises of a thick hedgerow that screens a graded embankment. This small strip is covered by Policies BNE34 and BNE36 of the Medway Local Plan, being outside both the golf driving range and the allotment site.

DC0902MW Page 31

To the north both sites are adjacent to the Horsted Valley Area of Local Landscape Importance (SNCI) (Policy BNE34) and Luton Banks Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI). This has the appearance of a thick band of trees, scrub and vegetation adjacent to the allotment boundary which then changing into open land. The allotments, the golf driving range and the adjacent nature conservation sites are protected by the open space (Policy L3). Background of Proposal The background to the application is that there has been a history of complaints and concerns expressed by local residents and users of the allotment with regard to stray golf balls being hit into the allotment site. This application is a revision to the earlier refused planning application (MC2006/1507), which was for an extension to the golf driving range. The previous application proposed an extension to the allotments; an extension to the SNCI; and the provision of a pedestrian link to the SNCI and public open space. The background to that previous application was;

1) Part of the golf driving range has inadvertently been used as allotment land; 2) There is an informal pedestrian link through from Street End Road across land owned

by the golf driving range operators but not currently used as part of the golf driving range which is in need of improvement, and

3) There is a strip of land extending to the north, which is shown as allotments on the Council’s Local Plan Map but which is not in such use, and is in fact part of the adjoining open space.

In connection with the earlier refused application, a letter of support had been submitted from the Council’s Senior Valuation Officer. He advised that the Council has received several complaints in recent years from allotments holders with plots at the south western end of the site that golf balls are being hit beyond the present boundary of the golf driving range onto the allotments. Part of the proposals will include a new boundary fence with the allotments that will provide a secure and safe environment for allotment holders. He also advised that Greenspace Services recognise the potential loss of part of the allotment land, but the proposed development maintains the current number of plots and would not detract from the viability of the Council’s allotment site. He considered that the overall benefits of the scheme out weigh the loss of a small piece of allotment land and that the level of Nature Conservation land is maintained. Proposal This current planning application is for the change of use of land to provide an extension to the Chatham golf driving range and the creation of an earth embankment and boundary fencing. The aims of the current Application described by the agent are to:

• Prevent golf balls from leaving the golf driving range. This is a health and safety issue with balls currently landing on the road and allotments;

• To remove informal access on the scrub bank between the golf driving range and the allotments that currently encourages anti-social behavioral activities. This is of particular concern to the local Ward Member on behalf of residents, and;

DC0902MW Page 32

• The creation of enhanced habitat on the new bank without the disturbance by public access.

The current proposal seeks to improve the boundaries along the northeast of the golf driving range and provide greater protection to the public allotments. Increasing the length of the range and providing higher elevation boundary fences will achieve this. The southwest boundary of the allotments, adjacent to the golf driving range, has been the subject of recent legal proceedings. The boundary between the two pieces of land is to be relocated as part of a separate agreement. The improvements proposed in this sub-division will utilise the additional land created at the end of the driving range by the new boundary alignments. The scheme comprises an extension of the existing earth embankment into the land created by the re-alignment of the allotment boundary. The proposed embankment will be constructed by the importation of suitable engineering fill, sourced locally and including granular/pervious material for the construction of the reinforced soil bank, “French drains” and paths. The embankment will be of a similar character to the existing embankment and will be planted with indigenous species to replace those lost during construction. The northeast face of the proposed embankment is to be steep with a gradient of 1:3 and will be constructed in layers of compacted fill reinforced by geo-fabric membranes. The face of the embankment will be planted to minimise future erosion. The upper elevations of the embankment will extend into the golf driving range to infill existing low points in the northern corner of the fairway. This will provide a raised boundary of constant level onto which the new boundary fence will be constructed. The submitted details (as amended) show that the proposed embankment will be 5 metres higher that the existing ground level. The existing 5-metre high mesh stop-ball fence will be replaced with a 2 metre high equivalent fence located on the top of the proposed embankment. Following a meeting with the agent, improvements have been made to the proposed embankment by way of replacing the top of the embankment by a 3 metre sloping soil bank with a reduced 2 metre fence. The proposed bank would slope down with a “bowl effect” into the range at a gradient of 1 in 3 and which would also assist in the mechanical retrieval of golf balls. In addition to the proposed planting on the allotment side of the stop ball fence, there will be the provision of an additional strip of 4 metres of planting at the end of the range with indigenous species. At the foot of the embankment is an unofficial footpath which is being used to gain public access into the surrounding woodland and nature conservation area and which is being used for unsavoury activities. A private access only footpath will be provided at the foot of the proposed embankment, aligned with the new boundary. This will be fenced off from the highway and exclude public access. Temporary construction vehicle access will be provided onto Street End Road. The length of time required to construct the embankment is primarily a function of the rate at which the soil and drainage material can be imported. To achieve the proposed construction period an average of 18 soil deliveries per day is required (i.e. a total of 36 vehicle movements). These deliveries will arrive as a series of peaks and troughs to suit the construction sequence and

DC0902MW Page 33

the local availability of the materials. Wheel clearing, road cleaning and dust suppression facilities will be included for lorries leaving the site. The proposed development will take approx one year to complete and work will be phased so that areas can be completed in a progressive manner allowing planting to start as early as possible.

Relevant Planning History ME75/595 Chatham Golf Centre.

Extension to ball dispensing area and professional shop. Approved 28.8.1975.

ME77/392 Allotment Gardens, Second Avenue.

Extension of existing allotment site including, the formation of a roadway and erection of six feet high chain link fence. Approved 20.7.1977

ME94/0557 Allotment Gardens, Second Avenue.

Proposed erection of a replacement store shed together with toilet facilities at the rear. Approved 5.9.1994.

MC2006/1507 Land at Street End Road, Chatham, Kent

Change of Use of land to provide an extension to the Chatham golf driving range; an extension to the allotments; an extension to the SNCI, and provision of a Pedestrian Link to the SNCI and public open space.

Refused 24.10.2006 Representations A notice has been displayed on site and the application has been advertised in the press as a major development. Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners/occupiers of the following properties: - 44 to 58 (evens incl.), 68 and 70 Rowan Lea; and 39 to 60 (odds incl.) Street End Road. The Environment Agency, Southern Water, The Ramblers Association, The Open Spaces Society, Kent Wildlife Trust, Natural England, the Countryside Agency, Medway Towns Sports Council and Chatham and District LGA Association (Medway Allotments Federation) have also been consulted. Chatham and District L.G.A. (Chairman of Medway Allotments Federation): Although resigned to the fact that the boundary fence was installed at the wrong angle and the use of two plots will be lost, further clarification is required on a number of points. It is imperative that the integrity of site security remains intact throughout the alterations. Appendix D only gives details of the 5m high Stop Fence. The new boundary fence marked on drawing No.RA/CGDR/001 indicates that there is to be a 2m high fence installed. Confirmation is sought that this is to be of a steel palisade type and will extend from the north corner through to the Street End Road corner. In order that security is not compromised it is suggested that the fence should be one of the first tasks completed. As the existing concrete path along the

DC0902MW Page 34

allotment side of the fence is to disappear under the new bank would it be possible to have a new path built along the new boundary fence? Concerns are raised that whilst the work is being carried out there will only be a couple of feet between the clearing/construction plant equipment and the plot holders. What temporary protection and or screening will be fitted in order to protect them? Clarification is required how and where the waste water from the wheel cleaning unit is to be disposed of. As this wastewater will be contaminated it must not be allowed to enter onto the allotment soil. What does the term “French drains” mean? The allotment site needs to be reassured that there will be no run off from the embankment into the allotments. Are these drains going to be connected into main drainage, pumped out of holding tanks or another solution? Advise that there is a mains sewer running from the golf driving range across the area under construction and then into the allotments. This is not shown on the location plan but needs to be highlighted, as a potential hazard. The agent has written to advise as follows: 1) Confirm that the re-alignment of the allotment fence will be one of the first tasks undertaken by their contractor. The section of the fence to be re-aligned will be dismantled and relocated along the new agreed boundary line, however should elements of the fence be damaged or unsuitable for re-use, they will be replaced like-for-like. 2) Replacing the concrete path is not part of the proposed works. The replacement of the path did not form part of the previous legal agreement relating to the boundary and is beyond the scope of the application. A new palisade fence was also not agreed to. 3) It is envisaged that the re-aligned fence will provide a secure boundary between the allotments and the proposed site. Should additional screening be desired, the applicant would be wiling to attach protective netting to the fence for the duration of the works. 4) The cleaning of vehicle wheels will be predominantly undertaken by mechanical methods. If water is used it will be re-circulated and re-used to minimise the quantity required. Every effort will be made to ensure that water does not drain onto the allotment land. 5) “French Drains” are buried gravel drains used to prevent the build up of excessive ground water. The proposed drains will maintain the existing drainage paths that maybe affected by the proposed embankment and routed towards the existing natural low spots. 6) The applicant is aware of the position of the existing sewer and it is the agent’s understanding that the manhole inspection cover will be outside the allotment boundary once the fence is realigned. The toe of the new embankment will avoid this existing manhole inspection cover. Environment Agency: The Environment Agency has no objection to the proposal, but advise that the site is located in an area, which is known to be at risk from flooding. However, due to the nature and scale of the proposal and the extremely low risk this poses, the Agency has no objection on flood grounds.

DC0902MW Page 35

The Environment Agency advised that the area at risk from flooding is a dry valley. It has not been active for many years, but could become active in very extreme circumstances. The Environment Agency request that the applicant should be made aware that the development, even if above the flood level, is within a flood plain and may have problems with surface water disposal, dampness and means of access during extreme flood events. Additionally they request that the applicant ensures that the existing drainage systems are well maintained and of sufficient capacity to cope with any additional flow or loading that may occur as a result of this proposal. (A copy of this letter has been sent to the applicant’s agent). Southern Water: A copy of a plan identifying the approximate position of a public sewer has been submitted. Southern Water (SW) advise that the exact position of the public sewer must be determined on site by the applicant before the layout of the proposed development is finalised. They further advise that no development or new tree planting should be located within 3 metres either side of the centreline of the public sewer and all existing infrastructure should be protected during the course of construction works. (A copy of this letter has been sent to the applicant’s agent). English Nature: Although no comments have been received on this current planning application, their comments on earlier application was as follows: “The proposal appears to have implications for the Luton Banks Site of Nature Conservation Interest and the Council’s attention is drawn to Paragraph 9 of Planning Policy Statement 9, which provides guidance on local sites, and Policy BNE36 of the Medway Local Plan. Based on the information supplied and having considered the limited nature of conservation information relating to this land that they hold, English Nature had no comments to make at present. However, it is possible that protected species may be using the site to be developed. As such, if the Council is aware of the presence, or representations from other parties highlighting the possibility of the presence of a protected or Biodiversity Action Plan species, the Council should request survey information from the applicant before determining the application”. Kent Wildlife Trust: The site lies within Local Wildlife Site (LWS)(formerly known as Sites of Nature Conservation Interest, SNCIs) ME06, Luton Banks. The boundary of the Site is clearly shown on the Local Plan Proposals Map (4). The Site is designated for its mosaic of chalk grassland, woodland and extensive areas of scrub. One of the scrubland areas is found along the existing embankment between the driving range and adjacent allotments. This area is linked directly to the wider scrub and woodland areas of the site and itself provide an important wildlife corridor to house gardens and open areas along and across Street End Road. All vegetation along this embankment is to be removed as part of the proposal. This represents not only a direct loss of important wildlife habitat but will have an indirect effect on biodiversity in the wider area as a result of habitat fragmentation. This is contrary to Policy BNE37 of the Local Plan, which provides “long term protection for sites of strategic and local nature conservation importance”, including SNCIs (now LWSs). The applicant’s Supporting Statement fails to even acknowledge, let alone address, the policy presumption against development that involves harm to the nature conservation interest of LWSs.

DC0902MW Page 36

In the circumstances, the Trust originally objected to the application and urged the Council to refuse planning permission for the northern and north eastern extension of the tipped ground and the removal of vegetation from the existing embankment. Given the threat to the nature conservation value of the site, they also urged the Council to protect the existing vegetation by serving, without delay, a woodland preservation order on the site. Following a further exchange of correspondence in-between the agent and Kent Wildlife Trust and the clarification of certain matters, and on the basis of the revisions made to the application and the planting specifications listed in the submitted appendix documents, the Trust has now withdrawn its original objections to the proposal, subject to the Council attaching suitable conditions to secure implementation of the revised planting proposals. Letters of representation: 1 letter of objection, in relation to the extension of the golf club has been received on the following grounds:

• Golf balls already periodically leave the golf range, despite the screen of trees and fencing.

• On occasion golf balls have hit cars and could lead to an accident The agent has written to advise that they confirm that stray balls are a problem and are aware that this has been a concern of residents for a long time. The proposed development seeks to resolve these problems. National Planning Guidance PPS1: Delivery and Sustainable Development PPS1A: Planning System & General Principles PPS 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPS23: Planning and Pollution Control Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 Policy SP1 (Sustainable pattern of Development)

Policy EN3 (Protection and enhancement of Countryside Character) Policy EN7 (County & Local Wildlife Designations) Policy EN8 (Protection, Conservation and Enhancement of Biodiversity) Policy EN9 (Trees, hedgerows and woodlands) Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy QL16 (Formal & Informal Recreation/ Sport facilities) Policy NR5 (Pollution Impacts) Policy NR6 (Development sensitive to Pollution) Policy TP15 (Development Traffic & Heavy Goods Vehicles) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principals for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Considerations) Policy BNE23 (Site Contamination)

DC0902MW Page 37

Policy BNE25 (Development in the Countryside) Policy BNE34 (Horsted Valley Area of Local Landscape Importance) Policy BNE35 (International and National Nature Conservation Sites) Policy BNE36 (Strategic and local Nature Conservation Sites) Policy BNE37 (Wildlife Habitats) Policy BNE38 (Wildlife Corridors and Stepping Stones) Policy BNE39 (Protected Species) Policy BNE42 (Hedgerow Retention) Policy BNE43 (Trees on Development Sites) Policy CF2 (New Community Facilities) Policy L3 (Protection of Open Space) Policy T1 (Impact of New development on the Highway Network) Policy T2 (Access to the Highway)

Planning Appraisal This application raises the following issues for consideration:

a) Matters of Principle: Nature Conservation Issues versus Health and Safety b) Ecological considerations c) Impact on the local landscape and street scene d) Impact on neighbour amenities, including contamination issues. e) Whether the proposal would prejudice highway safety and car parking implications.

Principle of the development: Nature Conservation Versus Health and Safety Issues Though the site is clearly situated within the urban boundaries, in its own right it is sited within an area that is washed over by policies aimed at protecting the rural character of the area, an area with high nature conservation value and ALLI (Area of Local Landscape Importance) and is afforded protection as an open space. As such, policies SP1, EN3, EN7 and EN8 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and Polices BNE35, BNE36, BNE37 and BNE39 seek to protect wildlife habitats, features and statutory protected species. Although the inclusion of this land as an extension to the golf driving range could be said to fall within the open space policy L3, there are concerns regarding the loss of the land from the above designations. The main issue with this application concerns the loss of land designated as being within an ALLI and part of the Luton Banks SNCI. Policy BNE36 advises that development in such areas that would materially harm, directly or indirectly, the scientific or wildlife interest of the site will not be permitted unless the development is connected with, or necessary to, the management of the site’s wildlife interest. Development for which there is an overriding need will exceptionally be permitted if no reasonable alternative site is (or is likely to be) available. The overriding need will be judged against the strategic and/or local importance of the affected nature conservation designation. In such exceptional circumstances, the detrimental impact upon the scientific or wildlife interest should be minimised and appropriate compensatory measures will be required.

DC0902MW Page 38

The Kent Wildlife Trust under the earlier refused scheme in connection with this area and as part of this current application were concerned that the proposal would lead to a net loss of biodiversity, as an area of habitat of high ecological value was considered to be potentially lost. The reason for refusal of the previous planning application was that it was not considered that an extension to an existing golf driving range is of such strategic or local importance as to override the site’s designation as being part of the Luton Banks SNCI. It was not considered that an exceptional case for this land to be released from this designation has been made and the Local Planning Authority could not endorse the loss of additional habitat that could not be easily replaced. Currently the site has in the main the appearance of a nature wildlife area by virtue of the existing shrubs and vegetation, apart from a small cleared area at the front of the site, adjacent to the road. In order to effect the proposals for the change of use, the whole site would have to be cleared of vegetation with a consequent loss of habitat and a detrimental impact upon the SNCI. The use of the land as part of the golf driving range would prevent the natural re-growth of the greenery and prevent wildlife re-establishing in the locality and therefore there would be a consequent harm to the local habitat. In addition to the above there were concerns with the visual impact that a change in the natural wildlife and organic area to a more man made manicured grassed area, would have. As such it was considered that these effects would be harmful to the appearance of the street scene. Since that refusal the Golf Club has appointed experts in the matter. Additionally, health and safety aspects in relation to golf balls increasingly entering into the adjacent allotment site has become increasingly problematic and of serious importance and concern. There have been a number of instances recently of golf balls landing amongst the allotment users. The local community is pressing for the proposed work to be undertaken as soon as possible and a determination is required in order to commence the works in September. Health and Safety Aspects This application is one of a fine balance between nature conservation issues and the health and safety of users of the adjacent allotments. With the improvement in golfing equipment and ball technology, professional golfers are now capable of driving distances of up to 300 metres compared with 200 metres a decade ago. Unfortunately, this has resulted in the increase of balls that frequently clear the existing end boundary fence, with a consequent increase in the number of near misses to users of the allotments and potential injury. The length of the golf driving range, together with the height and position of the perimeter stop ball end fence and proposed ground alteration works, have been determined to prevent both high ball and flatter trajectories from leaving the range. Various other options to resolve the situation have been looked into and dismissed. For example a suggestion to excavate the site at the tee end of the golf driving range. Apart from being financially unviable, the excavated materials would require to be removed off site to landfill and the associated engineering works would be in close proximity to housing. The golf driving range would need to close during the works. The sewer would require diversion and the existing golf driving range structures would require demolition and reconstruction. The resulting landform would be visually unsightly and out of keeping with its existing setting.

DC0902MW Page 39

A golf driving range needs to be visually appealing to attract users as well as being sympathetic to its surroundings. Amongst other parameters, the grass must be free draining, it has to operate safely and take due cognisance of the prevailing wind direction and position of the sun. Because of the combined boundary constraints of the adjacent Luton Banks (to which, incidentally, the golf range forms a natural buffer zone) the position of Street End Road and the Allotments, there is no room to manoeuvre. A balance between health and safety and the ecology and the visual impact of the project has to be sought and the applicant has worked closely with Kent Wildlife Trust with regard to ecological aspects and the replacement habitat to be created. The proposed scheme is thought to be an innovative and sympathetic solution to the health and safety issues within the constraints of this site, whilst bearing in mind the nature conservation issues. As such the principle of the development is considered acceptable. Ecological Considerations Policies SP1, EN3, EN7 and EN8 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and Polices BNE35, BNE36, BNE37 and BNE39 seek to protect wildlife habitats, features and statutory protected species. Should Planning Permission be granted for development appropriate conditions will need to be attached to ensure that protected species and/or their habitats are safe guarded and maintained Paragraph 16 of Planning Policy Statement No.9 (PPG9) states that: “the presence of a protected species is a material consideration when a Local Planning Authority is considering a development proposal which, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat.” Paragraph 14 of PPS9 also encourages Local Planning Authorities to seek measures from applicants to enhance the biodiversity of sites. In connection with this revised and modified planning application the current agent has submitted a habitat survey, which highlights that the site of the proposed scheme consists of amenity grassland, species poor hedgerows and semi mature trees. At present the habitat along the embankment is sub-optimal in nature, with the existing vegetation in a poor condition as it is growing on old landfill that was completed about 35 years ago. It is also subject to extensive human disturbance including unsavory behaviour. This is detrimental to any animals, which might be using the embankment for either foraging or nesting activities. The structural diversity of the embankment is also poor with a reasonably closed canopy ensuring little light, which means there is limited ground flora, which would discourage ground commuting animals from using the area. Furthermore it is a fragmented and low quality wildlife corridor with limited potential to benefit species using the adjacent Luton Banks area. The nature of the proposed works is not considered to have any major effect on the local nature conservation areas and the existing habitat is not considered to be ideal for the locally recorded protected species (bats, lizards, slowworms). However, the works will be carried out with vigilance and the presence of any species will be appropriately managed.

DC0902MW Page 40

The proposed embankment will be better fenced, have steeper slopes and will be vegetated with bramble type plants, all of which will help to reduce human activity in the area once the proposed scheme is constructed. Furthermore, the site will be planted throughout with indigenous species, increasing the biodiversity potential of the area. The extension to the golf driving range will ensure the creation of an open habitat structure that will encourage more floral species to naturally regenerate into the area from available seed banks in the locality, provided the soil conditions are similar in nature to those in the surrounding area. The extension will also ensure the creation of a good quality wildlife corridor, linking the area with Luton Banks, benefiting a wider range of species and encouraging species back into the area of the embankment. The four trees to be removed will be surveyed prior to works being undertaken for any nesting bird and bats. Four native new trees will be planted to replace those removed as part of the works. New areas of habitat will be created along both the north-west and south-east boundaries of the site. At present the south-east boundary along Street End Road consists of a species poor boundary hedgerow with trees. This is an area is heavily dominated by Leylandii. It is proposed to plant additional hedgerows along both these boundaries, which will provide valuable increased foraging, commuting and nesting potential for a wide variety of species. These hedgerows will be planted as a staggered double row with indigenous species mix of Blackthorn, Hawthorn, Field Maple, Dog Rose and Hazel, in order to create continuous habitat corridor improving the linkage both around the site and with the wider surrounding habitat. These sections will join up with the newly planted section along the north eastern boundary to form an extended continuous wildlife corridor linking with the newly created embankment and Luton Banks. New habitat will also be created in both the north and southeast corners of the site. In addition, a 4 metre wide strip on the relatively level surface on the inside of the end golf ball catchment fence will be planted. This will consist of a native scrub mix, which will be left unmanaged for the benefit of wildlife. These areas will have the potential to provide valuable foraging and commuting areas for a wide range of species. In addition to the proposed planting on the allotment side of the stop ball fence, the provision of an additional strip of 4 metres of planting, results in total a 7 metre wide planted wildlife and landscaped corridor at the top of the new bank and at the end of the range. In addition, a recognised pest weed of Japanese Knotweed will be removed (listed as an injurious plant under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) which will represent a significant improvement to the area’s biodiversity and habitat. There is also the argument that by excluding public access to the area, the creation of replacement habitat on the new bank will have an enhanced biodiversity due to the reduced disturbance by public access. In conclusion, it is expected that the quality of the habitat will be substantially improved in addition to the creation of new habitat along the site boundaries, all of which will greatly benefit biodiversity in the area in general.

DC0902MW Page 41

As such, it is considered that there is no ecological objection to the development, which now accords with the relevant Development Plan policies. In accordance with Government advice on enhancing biodiversity, should Members be minded to grant planning permission relevant conditions are requested. Impact on Landscape and the Street Scene Although the site lies within the boundaries of the urban area, the site itself forms part of the protected open space with wildlife designations. Therefore the proposal falls to be assessed against the criteria identified under Policies SP1 and EN3 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and Policy BNE34 of the Medway Local Plan. The site is located within the Horsted Valley ALLI (Policy BNE34) – a particularly attractive and important landscape, which provides a valuable open space close to a large urban area, and contributes significantly to the open space needs of adjoining communities. It provides a green backdrop to the south-east side of valley, which is generally built up. Policy BNE34 advises that development will only be permitted if it does not materially harm the landscape character and function of the area; the economic and social benefits are so important that they outweigh the local priority to conserve the area’s landscape. Any development permitted should be sited, designed and landscaped to minimise harm to the area’s landscape character and function. The appraisal relates to the impact that the area identified as for a change of use to being part of the golf driving range would have as well as the steep embankment and proposed 2 metre high stop-ball fence on top of that. Concerns were raised in connection with the previous planning application in that it was considered that such a high fence (5 metres proposed) and for such an expanse of length (approx 150 metres) would have an adverse visual impact upon the character of the street scene. Compared to the previous refused scheme, this current scheme does represent an improvement in that additional tree planting and other native planting is proposed to off set the loss of vegetation as a consequence of the land raising engineering works. Furthermore, the lower 2 metre high stop ball fence together with a sloping bank will have the same overall effect for golf ball containment as the original 5 metre high stop ball fence. This revised proposal has the added advantage that the enhanced vegetation and planting will completely obscure this fence within a relatively short period of time. The visual impact when viewed from both the Allotments and Street End Road will be that of a thicket covered slope. Following discussions with Kent Wildlife Trust it is proposed to plant the flat areas in each corner at the end of the range and to enhance the existing hedge boundary along Street End Road. It is not proposed to maintain the face of the embankment as it is to be part of the wildlife haven that will be created, with the added benefit of no public access. This will link with Luton Banks Area of Local Nature Interest and enhance the local biodiversity.

DC0902MW Page 42

Subject to a landscaping condition requiring the submission of exact details and of how the engineering mechanisms for the construction of the soil embankment will enable planting/trees to be supported and prevent soil erosion, it is considered that the submitted scheme will not harm the rural landscape character of the area. Bearing in mind the above, this proposal is considered to be acceptable in landscape and street scene terms and in accordance with the afore mentioned Development Plan Polices. Impact on Amenities Policies QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and Policies BNE1 and BNE2 of the adopted Local Plan seek to ensure that the amenities of existing residents are safeguarded. Policies NR6 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and BNE23 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 seek to protect human health and the environment against contamination. One of the aims of the current application is to prevent golf balls from leaving the golf driving range. Another aim is to remove informal access on the scrub bank between the golf driving range and the allotments that currently encourages anti-social behavior. These important aims must be balanced against the potential loss of visual amenities created by the embankment and the stop ball fence. Health and safety is a material consideration. It is considered that the proposal that will improves the boundaries between the two conflicting leisure uses (golf and allotments) together with the landscaping and additional planting proposals will create a safer environment for the users of the allotments who currently endure stray balls with possible injury and harm to property and health. It is considered that the loss of the existing informal open space contrary to policy L3 must be balanced against the health and safety issue, which will be improved. The concerns of the allotment users in relation to pollution and ensuring that the use of the inert imported material will not effect their land are noted, as are their concerns regarding the disposal of water from the wheel washing. However, the Environment Agency has not objected to the importation of material and the agent has addressed the wheel washing issues (see representations section above). A relevant condition is proposed to require the submission of details of the fill material including a chemical analysis prior to the creation of the earth embankment is recommended in the interests of preventing water and soil pollution. In amenity terms the proposal is therefore viewed as being acceptable and in accordance with the cited Development Plan Policies. Highways Impact, Traffic and Car Parking In terms of car parking provision, Policies T19 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan, and T13 of the adopted local Plan set out parking standards (as maxima). Policy TP15 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan, and Policies T1 and T2 of the adopted Local Plan deal with the impact of additional traffic caused by development and seek to ensure that the Highway network is adequate in terms of capacity and safety.

DC0902MW Page 43

As visitors to the golf driving range and the allotments is unlikely to change much as a result of this application, it is considered that there are no highway or car parking objections to the proposal caused by the proposal. However, the implication of the construction works of the embankment must be considered. Temporary construction vehicle access will be provided onto Street End Road and wheel-cleaning facilities will be provided within the site. The proposed development will take approx one year to complete and the work will be phased. The length of time required to construct the proposal is primarily a function of the rate at which the soil and drainage material can be imported. To achieve the proposed construction period an average of 18 soil deliveries per day is required (i.e. a total of 36 vehicle movements). These deliveries will arrive as a series of peaks and troughs to suit the construction sequence and the local availability of the materials. Wheel washing and road cleaning together with dust suppression facilities will be provided in relation to this development. As the traffic associated with the development will be temporary no highway or car parking objections are raised. However, it is considered prudent to have a condition so that the local Planning Authority can approve the details of the construction process via a 'Code of Construction Practice' Recommendation and reasons for Approval On balance, it is considered that the proposal is innovative and will resolve various public matters of contention (stray golf balls onto the adjacent allotment land and undesirable use of the public open space). It incorporates additional areas of planting and will create a new wildlife haven/corridor. The overall safety issues are also addressed within a sensitive landscape and ecological framework. Therefore the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions. This application would normally fall to be considered under officers’ delegated powers but has been reported for Members’ consideration due to the very sensitive nature of the proposal.

DC0902MW Page 44

6 MC2008/0591

Date Received: 3rd April 2008

Location: 4 Roebuck Road Rochester ME1 1UD Proposal: Construction of two storey side extension incorporating garage,

single storey rear extension and railings around lightwell (demolition of garage and bike store)

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Yalcin 4 Roebuck Road Rochester Kent ME1 1UD Agent: Mr P K Pilkington 4 Pattens Lane Rochester Kent ME1 2QN Ward: Rochester West Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. 2 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 north flank wall of the extension herein approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

3 Prior to the commencement of works on site full details of the bargeboard

(including colouring), the bonding and pointing, doors (including the garage door) and windows (including colouring), the railings around the light well (including their finished colour) and samples of brick work and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter retained unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking and garaging space

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.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report.

Site Description The application dwelling is a semi-detached property fronting Roebuck Road. Due to the difference in the land level between the front and rear of the property the dwelling is two

DC0902MW Page 45

storeys in height from the front elevation and three-storey in height from the rear elevation. The street scene comprises of other semi-detached houses which are similar in style, design and age and forms part of the Roebuck Road and Watts Avenue conservation area. To the front of the dwelling there is low level brick wall (approx) 0.5m in height with planting behind it (approx) 2.5m in height. There is an area to the front of the dwelling covered by planting and a parking area for two vehicles formed by block paving. To the side of the dwelling there is a garage which is linked to the neighbouring property of 6 Roebuck Road. This garage is a much later addition to the property and is not seen as a positive contribution to the overall street scene. The land level reduces from the front of the dwelling to the rear by (approx) 2.5m. There is a small patio area to the rear of the dwelling with the rest of the garden covered by planting. The boundary treatment is a brick wall (approx) 2m in height. There are other properties within the vicinity with side extensions. Proposal The submitted application proposes the construction of a two-storey side extension incorporating garage, single storey rear extension & railings around light well (demolition of garage & bike store) The proposal would be L-shaped and would be (approx) 6m in width by (approx) 10.3m in length and (approx) 9.6m in height. The development would create a new garage, additional space to kitchen and breakfast room at basement level and two bedrooms with WC and an en-suite at ground floor. The proposal would result in the number of bedrooms increasing from three to five. Although the proposal originally included a new wall and railings, the agent has amended the plans on the 2nd June 2008 so that this element of the proposal is removed.

Relevant Planning History

79/494 First floor extension and loft conversion, Approved, 17th July 1979 (10 Roebuck Road)

95/0147 Demolition of existing shed and, erection of a single storey side,

extension to existing garage, approved, 26th April 1995

MC2001/0022 Construction of part single/two storey extension to side, Approved with conditions, 26th February 2001 (20 Roebuck Road)

Representations One letter has been received but has been countersigned by four people and in it raises a concern that to the proposal will create an imbalance and an eyesore. Development Plan Policies Kent & Medway Structure Plan 2006

Policy QL1 (Quality of development and design)

DC0902MW Page 46

Policy QL6 (Conservation Areas) Policy TP19 (Vehicle parking standards)

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General principles for built development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE12 (Conservation areas) Policy BNE14 (Development in conservation areas) Policy T1 (Impact of development) Policy T13 (Vehicle parking standards)

Planning Appraisal Street scene and design The development would be visible from Roebuck Road with the exception of the single storey element. However, this element would be visible from neighbouring properties and gardens. The overall scale of the proposed side extension would be large when considering its length and width. However, the size of the plot combined with the fact that the proposal would only project (approx) 1.45m further to the rear of the existing property means that it is not considered to be an over development of the plot or result in a development that has a cramped appearance. The proposal results in the removal of the existing garage that is not beneficial to the appearance of the dwelling or the existing street scene. Furthermore, there are other properties in the Road that have been extended (i.e. Number 10 (79/494) & 20 Roebuck Road (MC2001/0022)). The proposal is designed with a gable end feature to the front elevation and this is in keeping with the design of the existing dwelling. The window designs to the front and rear elevations of the proposal are in keeping with the existing dwelling, although further details are required to ensure that the character of the dwelling is retained. A condition is also required to ensure that further details of the doors (including the garage door), pointing, bonding and the choice of materials (roof tiles and bricks) are appropriate within this Conservation Area. Railings around light well There are a number of other dwellings located nearby that have this feature. This element of the proposal would not therefore be introducing a new or detrimental feature to the street scene. A condition is recommended to ensure that further details of the colouring of the railings are submitted to ensure that it is in keeping with the surrounding street scene and the Conservation Area. Taking the above into account, the proposal is not considered to be detrimental to the character or appearance of the dwelling, the setting of the conservation area or the street scene as a whole. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies QL1 & QL6 of the Kent & Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policies BNE1, BNE12 & BNE14 of the Medway Local Plan 2003. Neighbour Amenities The neighbouring property of 6 Roebuck Road is located to the north of the application site. The proposal would result in the application dwelling being closer to this neighbouring

DC0902MW Page 47

property but would still retain a gap at first floor of (approx) 4m. Considering the path which the sun travels, the location of the properties, the siting of habitable room windows and the potential impact from existing windows, it is not considered that there would be a detrimental impact on the amenities of this neighbour in terms of loss of daylight, sunlight, outlook or privacy. A condition is required to control the siting of any windows on the north flank of the proposed extension. However, it is considered reasonable in this instance to impose such a condition to avoid any potential impact in terms of privacy. The neighbouring property of 2 Roebuck Road is located to the south of the application site. Considering that the proposal would only project (approx) 1.45m further to the rear of the existing dwelling. The impact of the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of this neighbouring property. There will be no adverse impact in terms of daylight, sunlight, outlook and privacy. Due to siting and relationship of the development to adjoining properties no other neighbouring dwellings would be detrimentally affected by the development, in terms of general amenity. Therefore the proposal is in accordance with Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policy BNE2 of the Medway Local plan 2003. Highways The proposal would result in the creation of two additional bedrooms. Taking into account the amount of off road parking currently available and the parking proposed, there would be no detrimental impact on the highway in terms of parking or general highway safety. Therefore the proposal would be in accordance with Policy TP19 of the Kent & Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policies T1 & T13 of the Medway Local Plan 2003. Conclusions and reasons for Approval Taking into consideration the overall design of the proposal and other similar development in the vicinity, the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the dwelling, the conservation area within which it is located or the street scene in general. Furthermore it is not considered that the development would have any adverse impact on the neighbour’s amenities or highways safety. Therefore the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies QL1 & QL6 of the Kent & Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policies BNE1, BNE2, BNE12, BNE14, T1 and T13 of the Medway Local Plan 2003. This application would normally be considered under the officers delegated powers but has to be reported to Members due to the number of representations received made contrary to the recommendation

DC0902MW Page 48

7 MC2008/0798

Date Received: 8th May 2008

Location: 80-86 John Street, Rochester, Kent ME1 1YW Proposal: Increase in roof height to form additional level to accommodate four

1-bedroomed flats with external escape stair case to rear (Resubmission of MC2007/0165)

Applicant: Asonic UK 196 Perth Road Gants Hill Essex 1G2 6DZ Agent: Mr P Hutchinson Peter Hutchinson Architects 50 Ospringe Street

Faversham Kent ME13 8TN Ward: Rochester East Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. 2 Notwithstanding the materials listed on the plans details and samples of any

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

3 No development shall take place until arrangements for the conduction and

extraction of fumes from the A5 units on the ground floor have been made in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details as approved shall be provided in full working order prior to the first occupation of any of the new flats created and such arrangements shall thereafter be retained.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see planning Appraisal section and conclusions at the end of this report.

Site Description The application site is set in a mixed area of residential flats and houses and commercial properties. The three-storey block has commercial units on the ground floor (comprising A5, A1 and vacant units) with residential above. To the east is a four-storey block of flats, the west a two-storey building with a pub on the ground floor with residential above, to the north two-storey flats and houses and to the south a terrace of two-storey houses. Directly to the rear of the block is a block of garages and to the front on street parking that is available for use by the public.

DC0902MW Page 49

The block has a run down appearance and is of low architectural quality. On the southern side of John Road the buildings are predominately flat roofed and to the north pitch roofed. Proposal Planning consent is sought for an increase in roof height to form an additional level. The height of the building will increase from approx. 8.5m to 11.3m. The additional floor is proposed to be placed onto the original roof. The rather large overbearing roof overhang will be removed. The raised roof will accommodate four 1-bedroomed flats each with an open plan kitchen/living room and bathroom. Access to the flats will be via an internal staircase but an external escape staircase to the rear is planned for fire escape purposes. This external staircase is planned with a curved screen wall. The new and existing bands between the windows and the stair area are proposed to be clad in timber (probably Western Red Cedar) boarding with new vertical windows added to the stair well. The current proposal alters from the previously refused scheme through the re-design of the extension which removes of the concrete overhang and adds cladding to the existing and proposed bands between the windows and the stair area. Site Area/Density Site area: 0.067 hectares (0.165 acres) Site density: 119.40 d.p.h (48.48 d.p.a)

Relevant Planning History MC2007/0165 Increase in roof height to form additional level to accommodate four 1-

bedroomed flats with external escape staircase to rear Refused 15 May2007 The current application differs from that previously refused through a different design for the proposed extension and through the inclusive treatment of the facade of the building. Representations The application has been advertised on site. Consultation letters have been sent to the Primary Care Trust, The Police Architectural Liaison Officer, Edf Energy And Southern Gas Networks. Neighbour consultation letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of numbers 41-47 (odd) St Peter Street; 3-15 (odd) and 102 and 104 Delce Road; 155-181 (odds) Rochester Avenue and 31 Hallsfield Road Two letters of representation have been received making the following comments:

• Detract from the appearance of the premises • Tower over the premises opposite and the adjacent pub • Dominate the streetscape • Pressure on parking • Fire escape is inadequate may impede access from the ground floor shops adjacent to

it

DC0902MW Page 50

• In danger of becoming the future carbuncle within the city of Rochester if it is extended in this manner

• Extending the flues will make the rear of the building even more unattractive than it is at present

• Security will be compromised • Loss of privacy from the fire escape • Noise and disturbance

A petition with 74 signatures has been received raising the following concerns:

• Devaluation of the top floor of the property • Restricted parking • Noise disturbance • Inconvenience for customers and residents • The loss of sunlight for opposite residents • Safety of pedestrians • Loss of privacy

Southern Gas Networks has written to advise the presence of gas mains in the proximity of the site Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy HP4 (Housing: Quality and Density of Development) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

Medway Local Plan 2003

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

Planning Appraisal The main planning considerations in the determination of this application are:

• Street scene and design • Amenity • Highways

Street Scene and Design The area comprises of low quality buildings and the application site is considered to be of no architectural merit. The proposed scheme is different to that previously refused by enhancing the external appearance of the building through the removal of the concrete overhang and the use of cedar boarding between the windows and on the stair well. This forms a more cohesive appearance to the building and ties the existing and proposed together. It is

DC0902MW Page 51

considered that the proposal is now in accordance with PPS1 and Local Plan policy H4, in that it provides a clear improvement to the local environment. The increased height of the building is considered acceptable with regard to the height and mass of the other buildings in the area and does not appear out of character within the street scene, and with the proposed enhancements to the existing building it is considered that this development would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of the streetscene. The flues to the rear of the property are likely to have to be extended in order to overcome any environmental concerns. This can be a condition of the application to ensure that they are of a sympathetic nature and do not compromise the design. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policies H4 and BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan 2003. Neighbourhood Amenity Due to the siting and orientation of the building with regard to the neighbours to the south it is considered that there would be no significant issue with regard to loss of sunlight, daylight, outlook or privacy. Due to the height and design of the block of flats to the east with no flank wall windows it is considered that there would be negligible affect on the amenities of the occupants with regard to outlook, daylight, sunlight or privacy. The applicants have submitted a report on daylight and sunlight which primarily focuses on the affect the proposed extension would have with regard to the neighbour to the west which is a two storey building comprising a pub on the ground floor with residential above. The flat at first floor has several windows on the eastern flank that relate to a conservatory, lounge, kitchen and bathroom. The flat roof of the pub below is used as a roof terrace which is the only outside amenity space. The report sets out that the loss of daylight to this neighbours windows would be negligible when compared to the existing situation and unlikely to be noticeable and therefore are not thought to be harmful. The Building Research Establishment Guide (BRE) gives a total of 1486 hours as an annual average for sunlight likely to be received and recommends that windows should receive 25% of annual hours sunlight with 5% during the winter. The report shows that the adjacent neighbour – 78 John Street (The Mordon Arms PH), will receive substantially more than the Guides minimum recommended annual level and winter levels. There would be a small reduction in sunlight through the proposed scheme but this is not deemed sufficient to justify refusing permission. The sun on the ground indicators have shown that the roof terrace of the Mordon Arms will have a slight reduction in the amount of sunlight but by 11.30 hours the effects of the new extension will have disappeared. It is considered that the applicants have produced evidence that the amenities of the occupants of 78 John Street would not be significantly adversely affected by the proposal and as such the development would be in accordance with the advice given in Policy QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and Policy BNE2 of the Medway Local Plan 2003. Highways No parking spaces are proposed for the development, however there is on street parking in the form of parking bays directly to the front, which have no restrictions, this combined with

DC0902MW Page 52

the small number of units sought is considered to be acceptable. There are no objections in terms of highway safety and the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies T1 and T13 of the local plan. Conclusions and Reasons for Approval The principle of the proposed development and the design are considered to be satisfactory. The proposed development will not be out of context with its surroundings and it is considered to be acceptable for the reasons outlined above. It is therefore recommended that the proposal be approved subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. The proposal therefore accords with the provisions of Policies QL1, T19, and HP4 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE1, BNE2, T13 and H4 of the adopted Local Plan and the application is accordingly recommended for approval. The application would normally be determined under delegated powers but is being referred for member consideration due to the extent of representations received expressing views contrary to the recommendation. [This application was considered by Members at the Development Control Committee on the 2nd July 2008, when it was determined to defer a decision to enable a Members’ site visit to be held.]

DC0902MW Page 53

8 MC2008/0890

Date Received: 28th May 2008

Location: 47 Wainscott Road Wainscott Rochester ME2 4LA Proposal: Change of use from Retail (Class A1) to Cafe (Class A3) Applicant: Mr A Hodja 3 Sherbourne Road Strood Rochester Kent ME2 3LX Agent: Mr J Liddiard 14 Wentworth Drive Cliffe Woods Rochester Kent ME3

8UL Ward: Strood Rural Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. 2 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a scheme for the

extraction and treatment of cooking fumes, including details for the control of noise and vibration from the system, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before the use hereby permitted is first commenced and thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details.

3 The use hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours of 0800 and 2200

Mondays to Saturdays inclusive with no opening on Sundays or National Holidays. 4 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted details of refuse

storage, disposal and collection arrangements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented at all times that the development hereby approved is in use and thereafter maintained.

5 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted the frontage of

the site shall be marked out for car parking spaces, including one space suitable for use by the disabled, in accordance with details which have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These car parking spaces, together with access thereto shall thereafter be kept available for parking in connection with the use hereby permitted.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see the Planning Appraisal section and conclusion at the end of this report.

Site Description

DC0902MW Page 54

The application site appears as a fairly large single dwelling although the ground floor, now vacant, was last used for Class A1 retail purposes. The building is two storey, rendered with a slate roof, and has an open, hardsurfaced forecourt that has a drop kerb onto Wainscott Road in front. The building is attached to the Co-op retail store to the south. To the north is Hills Motors, the car repairs building being set back with a parking area in front. There is a bus stop in front of the Co-op, the associated bus stop road markings also protruding in front of part of the application site, the remainder of the frontage being covered by ‘Keep Clear’ marking in association with site and adjacent garage access. The surrounding area primarily comprises of terraced houses although there are also a number of other non-residential uses scattered along the street. As few properties have off-street parking facilities levels of on-street parking are generally high, including opposite the site in Wainscott Road. Proposal It is proposed to use the ground floor of the premises as a Class A3 café. There would be no external alterations. The floor plans show 6 tables sitting 4 people each. It is stated that the opening hours would be 8am to 10pm Monday to Saturday with no opening on Sundays and Bank Holidays and that there would be 2 full-time and 2 part-time employees. The first floor is to be retained in residential use, providing a two bedroomed flat that shares the kitchen with the ground floor use.

Relevant Planning History 6/57/66 Additions Approved 8 May 1957 ME/75/632 Proposed extension to form a kitchen, bedroom, toilet and washroom Approved 26 August 1975 94/0570 Part single and two storey rear extension Approved 15 September 1994 MC2005/2307 Lawful Development Certificate (existing) for the use of the two ground

floor front rooms in the property as a hair salon Approved 13 December 2005 Representations The application has been advertised on site by the posting of a site notice. Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owner/occupier of 41, 43-45, 49, 51 and 14-22 (even) Wainscott Road. Frindsbury Extra Parish Council have conformed that they have no objection to the application. Three letters of concern have been received, in summary raising the following issues:

• lacking of parking, there is already a parking problem in the area, this would worsen, café visitors would need park for sometime, the road is congested with parked vehicles, buses have difficulty passing lorries and Co-op delivery lorries park at the bus stop, the cafe will need deliveries too;

DC0902MW Page 55

• hours of opening – teenagers collect at the bus stop outside the Co-op in the evenings causing a disturbance; and

• no need in this residential area. Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy TP3 (Transport and the Location of Development)

Policy TP19 (Parking Standards) Medway Local Plan 2003 Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy BNE3 (Noise Standards)

Policy R10 (Local Centres, Village Shops & Neighbourhood Centres) Policy R18 (Take Away Hot Food Shops, Restaurants, Cafes, Bars and

Public Houses) Policy T1 (Impact of Development)

Policy T2 (Access to the Highway) Policy T13 (Parking Standards) Planning Appraisal Principle Although the ground floor of the premises is currently vacant the authorised/historic use is for Class A1 retail purposes. Policy R10 of the Local Plan applies to all shops within Wainscott and says that development involving the loss of existing shopping facilities (including uses within Classes A1, A2 and A3) will not be permitted unless an improvement to local amenity or the provision of community facilities occurs that outweighs the loss. The change of use of the current premises from Class A1 to Class A3 would be acceptable with regard to this policy. Policy R18 of the Local Plan provides more specific advice on hot food and drink uses. It says that such uses will be permitted outside core retail areas provided certain criteria are met. It is not considered that the proposed use would result in an unacceptable concentration of such uses in the locality. There is a public house, the Stag Inn, at no. 65 and the Wainscott Institute Club is located on the corner of Wainscott Road and Hollywood Lane. There are also hot food takeaways at 1 Wainscott Road (the Golden Fish Bar) and 113 Wainscott Road (Dynasty, Chinese). The other assessment criteria relate to amenity and access/parking matters and will be addressed in detail below. Amenity Considerations There is already an authorised use of the premises for retail purposes (which has no hours of use control) and the site is located between the Co-op retail store and a car repairs garage. Although Wainscott is primarily a fairly tight-knit residential village the site is positioned within the small concentration of commercial uses within it. In these circumstances it is not considered that the proposed change of use from retail to café use would result an unacceptable impact on the amenities of local residents. However it is clearly important to

DC0902MW Page 56

control the hours of use of the cafe to avoid nuisance late at night. The proposed hours of opening are 8am to 10pm Monday to Saturday with no opening on Sundays and Bank Holidays. The adjacent Co-op is open from 7am-10pm Monday to Saturday and 9-8pm on Sundays. The nearby public house and Chinese takeaway are open for longer hours although the fish bar closes at 8:45pm. In this context the proposed hours of opening are considered acceptable, the closing time being 10pm, the same as the adjacent Co-op. It is important that any café/restaurant use includes the implementation of a suitable scheme for the extraction and treatment of cooking fumes. No details have been provided with the application and this matter will therefore need to be dealt with by a suitably worded planning condition. Similarly details of facilities for the storage, disposal and collection of refuse in connection with the proposed use will also be required by planning condition. In summary the impact of the development on amenity is therefore considered acceptable including with regard to the advice given in Policies BNE2 and BNE3 of the Local Plan. Highways and Parking The forecourt of the premises is hardsurfaced with a drop kerb across the frontage and can realistically provide parking for 3 cars, 1 of which could be designated specifically for the disabled. At times access onto the road in front may be blocked, for example when there is a bus at the bus stop, but this is likely to have a relatively small impact on use of the frontage by café users. This level of parking would not exceed the maximum provision of 13 spaces specified by the adopted standards. The site frontage could also be used for deliveries to the café. It is recognised that there are generally high levels of on-street parking in Wainscott Road. However, as stated previously there is a historic and authorised use of the premises for Class A1 retail purposes. In this context it is not considered that the proposed café use, would necessarily result in the generation of a significant increase in traffic/parking demand in the area. The café use may result in some longer stays but it is noted that the café would be small, with only 6 tables shown on the proposed plans. With regard to highway safety the accident database indicates that there was one accident outside 49 Wainscott Road in 2006 where a bus, unable to use the bus stop because of a parked car, mounted the pavement and knocked down a pedestrian resulting in slight injury. Whilst it is possible to associate this accident with parking pressures in Wainscott Road, one accident in three years does not suggest an over-riding safety problem, particularly as the adjacent Co-op is likely to generate a higher parking demand than the proposed café use. In summary the highways and parking impact of the proposed development are considered acceptable including with regard to the advice given in Policies TP3 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies T1, T2 and T13 of the Local Plan. Conclusions and reasons for approval The continued use of the premises for shopping purposes is supported by Policy R10 of the Local Plan and the change of use to a café does not conflict with the provisions of Policy R18 of this Plan. Subject to conditions the impact on amenity is considered acceptable and there would not be significant harm from the parking and highways impacts. Approval subject to appropriate conditions is therefore recommended as the development would accord with the

DC0902MW Page 57

guidance given in Policies QL1, TP3 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE2, BNE3, R10, R18, T1, T2 and T13 of the Local Plan. The application would normally be determined under delegated powers but is being referred to committee due to the number of representations received that hold a view contrary to the Officer recommendation.

DC0902MW Page 58

9 MC2008/0911

Date Received: 29th May 2008

Location: Adjacent to 5 Kemp Close Chatham Proposal: Construction of a 3-bedroomed detached house Applicant: CMD Developments Limited 29 Acacia Gardens Bathpool Taunton

Somerset England TA2 8TA Agent: Mr I Mutch Harrison Mutch Ltd Oasis House Ambley Green

Gillingham Business Park Gillingham Kent ME8 0NJ Ward: Rochester South & Horsted Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

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 retained. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3 Details and/or samples of any materials to be used externally (including roofing

materials, facing bricks and/or other cladding materials, mortar, bonding and pointing details, lintels, cills, entrances, fenestration and any other external details) 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 and thereafter maintained.

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development Order) 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows other than those shown on the approved plans shall be installed in the flank wall(s) of the dwelling herein approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

5 The windows on the south-eastern flank elevation shall be fitted with obscure glass

and shall be non-opening apart from any top hung fan light that has a minimum cill height of 1.7 metres above the internal finished floor level.

6 The area shown on the permitted drawings for vehicle parking shall be kept

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

DC0902MW Page 59

7 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, E and F of Part 1 and Class A, Part 2 of the Second Schedule to the Order shall be carried out on the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see planning appraisal section and conclusion at the end of this report.

Site Description The application site comprises the garden to the side (south-east) of No. 5 Kemp Close, which is a two storey end of terrace house. The site is approximately 6m wide across the front, widening to 11m wide at the rear. The garden is currently enclosed by a 1.8m high fence along the south-eastern boundary, together with various small trees and shrubs. The garden is mostly laid to lawn with borders. There are some higher trees on the rear boundary of No. 5, which backs onto the rear gardens of the properties in Hurstwood. The land slopes up fairly steeply from the north-west to the south-east, from the junction with Woodhurst, up across the plots of Nos. 1 to 5 Kemp Close to the three storey townhouses at the top of Kemp Close. As a result of the slope of the land, Nos. 1 to 5 each step up by approximately 900mm. Kemp Close is laid out in a ‘T’ junction. The front of the application site faces the rising section of Kemp Close and the side faces the flat section, which results in the plot being on a corner. The surrounding area is residential in character, and made up of similar house types and ages. There are no parking restrictions and there is some on-street parking in the area. No. 5 has a dedicated parking area adjacent No. 1. Proposal The proposal is for the construction of a three bedroom detached house. The proposed house will have roughly the same footprint as the neighbouring property No. 5, at 5.4m wide and 8.2m deep. The house will be set back approximately 0.8m behind the main front and rear building line of No. 5, and will be positioned approximately 1.4m away from its flank elevation. The house will have a 13.5m deep rear garden, with a patio immediately to the rear of the house. The boundaries to the rear garden will comprise the existing and new matching close boarded fencing to a height of 1.8m. The front garden will remain largely open, with planting. There will be a parking area for two cars accessed via a crossover on the flank boundary. The hardstanding and paths will comprise brindle concrete block paving.

DC0902MW Page 60

The proposed house will step up relative to its neighbour at No. 5; the ridge height will be approx. 0.5m higher and the eaves will be approx. 1m higher. The property will have a hipped roof and a single storey projection to the front on the ground floor, the roof of which will wrap around to the side to form a canopy over the front door. No specific materials have been detailed for the building, although colours have been identified. These include brown roof tiling, yellow facing bricks to walls, brown plain tile hanging, white UPVC rainwater goods, windows, fascias, bargeboards, etc., and white render to the single storey corner element at the front. The house will comprise a hallway, WC, kitchen and living/dining room on the ground floor and three bedrooms and a bathroom on the first floor. There will be no windows on the flank elevation facing No. 5; there will be two windows on the south-eastern elevation serving a bathroom and landing and the front door. Site Area/Density Site area: 0.0263 ha (0.0650 acres) Site density: 38 dph (15 dpa)

Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history for this site. Representations The application has been advertised on site and neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owner/occupiers of: 1-3 (odds), 7-23 (odds) and 6-10 (evens) Kemp Close, and 12-18 (evens) Hurstwood. Three representations have been received from neighbouring properties, objecting on the following grounds: Parking in this area is already extremely tight; the area of road along the side of this plot

is constantly crammed with cars, particularly in the evenings. This blocks the drives of the properties opposite. The development would introduce even more traffic to this congested area.

This is already an overpopulated area with a bad level of antisocial behaviour. The view from the properties opposite would be changed. There would be noise and disruption during construction. The development would affect the price and saleability of existing surrounding houses (as

Members will be aware this issue is not a material planning consideration). Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy HP4 (Housing: Quality and Density of Development) Policy TP3 (Transport and the Location of Development) Policy TP19 (Vehicle Parking Standards)

DC0902MW Page 61

Medway Local Plan 2003

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

Planning Appraisal The main issues in the consideration of this application are as follows: whether the principle of development is acceptable whether the proposal would cause harm to the character and appearance of the street

scene; whether the proposal would be detrimental to the amenities of neighbouring properties

and future occupiers; and whether the proposal would have an adverse impact on parking or highway safety.

Principle In terms of considering the principle of the development, the general guidance given in PPS3: Housing advises of the need to make effective and efficient use of previously developed land. Policy HP4 of the Structure Plan seeks to secure the efficient use of land in conjunction with the delivery of high quality design by realising densities of between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare. Policy H4 of the Local Plan allows residential development within urban areas, provided the site is vacant or derelict, or the development is a redevelopment of an existing residential area, and infilling will provide a clear improvement in the local environment. It is clear that in achieving the best use of urban land regard has to be had to density as well as design. This application proposes a density of 38 dwellings per hectare. The area is mixed and comprises both higher and lower density development. As the proposed density falls between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare it would meet the requirements of Policy HP4. Furthermore, as the site comprises a fairly wide garden area to the side of No. 5 Kemp Close, the application site is considered to form a gap site within an urban area, and as such could lend itself to some form of residential development, which would meet the requirements of Policy H4. It is considered that the proposal would not represent an over-development of the site having regard to the existing development in the area, and is therefore considered to be acceptable in principle. Street Scene and Design Policy BNE1 of the Local Plan seeks to ensure that development is appropriate in terms of its layout and siting, details, materials, proportion, scale and mass, and that it respects the scale, appearance and location of surrounding buildings and spaces.

DC0902MW Page 62

The redevelopment of this site for residential purposes would be in keeping with the character of the area. The siting and building line of the proposed house would generally be in keeping with that of the neighbouring terraced houses along this part of the road. The rear garden will be similar in width and depth to the neighbouring gardens, and therefore the amenity space will be adequate. The design of the proposed house has taken features from the adjacent terraced houses and similar materials are proposed, including a single storey front projection, which will be white render similar to the feature areas of white boarding on the adjacent houses, and the use of yellow bricks at ground floor and brown tile hanging at first floor. As exact materials have not been specified and in order to ensure those used will fit in with the appearance of neighbouring properties, it will be appropriate to request details under a relevant condition. The main difference is the roof shape, as it is hipped rather than gabled like the adjacent houses. However, the hipped roof will give the house a shallower roof pitch and is visually less dominant, particularly as the roof has to step up to accommodate the slope of the land. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the requirements of Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE1 of the Local Plan. Amenity Considerations Policy BNE2 seeks to ensure development does not affect the amenity of existing residents or future occupiers through loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight, or noise, activity levels and traffic generation. Representations have been made from the occupants of the three storey terraced townhouses at the top of Kemp Close, raising concerns about the impact of the development in terms loss of view, which in itself is not a material planning consideration. Owing to its siting and distance from these properties (18m away) and those immediately opposite, it is considered that the proposed house will not result in any adverse affects upon the amenities of those properties in terms of outlook, privacy or loss of light. Similarly, due to the siting and distance from the properties on Hurstwood, over 35m away, it is considered that the proposed house will also not result in any adverse affects upon the amenities of those properties. The property most likely to be affected by the proposed development would be No. 5 Kemp Close. In terms of the impact on this property, the north-western flank elevation of the proposed house will be approximately 1.4m away from the flank of No. 5. Although close, this distance is not out of keeping with the existing separations between buildings nearby. There are no windows on the flank of either No. 5 or the proposed house, so direct overlooking will not be a concern. The presence of the proposed house will clearly result in additional windows overlooking the retained rear garden of No. 5, and will also give also oblique views over the gardens of Nos. 1 and 3, but as terraced houses, the gardens are not particularly private or secluded due to the proximity of houses to each other. Therefore the presence of the proposed house would raise no new or significant privacy concerns for the neighbouring properties.

DC0902MW Page 63

Owing to its siting and orientation, the proposed house would not cause an unacceptable loss of light or shadowing for the occupiers of No. 5. The rear elevation of the proposed house would project less than 1m beyond the rear building line of No. 5 and will therefore not raise any serious issues with regard to loss of outlook or dominance for the neighbouring occupiers. It is further considered that the retained garden area of No. 5 will be adequate to serve its needs. With respect to the amenities of the prospective occupiers of the proposed house, it is considered that the relationship between the new house and neighbouring properties is such that the occupiers of the new house will experience acceptable levels of privacy, outlook and light. With respect to amenity space, this will be adequate. There also would appear to be adequate circulation, living and eating, and storage space for the house, and all rooms will have adequate access to light and ventilation. The proposed accommodation is therefore considered to be acceptable. Furthermore, in terms of noise and general disturbance to neighbouring properties, the use of the site for one house is unlikely to create an unacceptable level of activity, noise or disturbance on this site, particularly as the area is residential in character and the proposed use will be in keeping with this. There are therefore no objections in relation to the requirements of Policy QL1 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE2 of the Local Plan. Highway Considerations In this location there are no objections to the principle of a residential use, and it is unlikely that this will raise concerns over highway safety due to the low levels of traffic using the close. The proposed development will include two off-road parking spaces. In this urban area there is a maximum requirement for 1.5 parking spaces per unit, and therefore the proposal complies with the adopted parking standards. Residents have raised concerns about additional parking from the development; however, as the proposal is only for one house, it is considered that any additional on-street parking associated with this development would not be prejudicial to highway safety, or give rise to any unacceptable pressures on such opportunities that might be viewed as being harmful to the amenities of the occupiers of other properties in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore, the site is located within an urban area, close to public transport links and local amenities, therefore additional parking is not considered critical. In addition, cars will be unlikely to park in front of the proposed driveway, which may help to clear any on-street parking that might occur on this section of the close, ameliorating residents’ concerns about being blocked into their driveways. It is therefore considered that the proposed development will not be detrimental to parking or highway safety, and accordingly no objection is raised to these aspects of the application under the provisions of Policies TP3 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies T1 and T13 of the Local Plan.

DC0902MW Page 64

Recommendation The design of the proposed development will be in keeping with the character and appearance of the street scene, and there are likely to be no adverse effects on the amenities of neighbouring properties or future occupiers, or on parking or highway safety. As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable and the application therefore accords with the provisions of Policies QL1, HP4, TP3 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE1, BNE2, H4, T1 and T13 of the adopted Local Plan. The application is accordingly recommended for approval. [This application would normally fall to be determined under delegated powers, but is being reported for Members consideration due to the number of representations received contrary to the recommendation.]

DC0902MW Page 65

10 MC2008/0973

Date Received: 13th June 2008

Location: 59 Chalfont Drive Rainham Gillingham ME8 9DW Proposal: Construction of a part two/part single storey side/rear extension

(demolition of existing garage) Applicant: Mr P Harris 59 Chalfont Drive Rainham Gillingham Kent ME8 9DW Agent: Mr S Ferguson-McCardle Crixhall House Buckland Lane Staple

Canterbury Kent CT3 1JY Ward: Rainham Central Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. 2 Materials used on the construction of external surfaces of the extension hereby

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 additional windows shall be installed in the flank walls or roof plane of the extension hereby approved without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

4 The high level windows in the southeastern roof plane of the development hereby

approved shall remain as high level windows with a minimum internal floor to cill height of 1.8m for the duration of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5 The ground floor window in the southeastern elevation of the development shall be

fitted with obscure glass and shall be non-opening apart from any top hung fan light that shall have a minimum internal floor to cill height of 1.8 metres for the duration of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see planning appraisal section and conclusion at the end of this report.

Site Description 59 Chalfont Drive is situated in a residential part of Gillingham. The properties are mixed in design but mainly two storey semi detached. Opposite to the southwest there are some detached bungalows. Most properties have garages and driveways. There is both on street

DC0902MW Page 66

and off road parking available and the land slopes down to the northeast. There are various extensions visible in the street scene most notably at 14 and 16 Wimbourne Drive. The application site is a semi detached property at the end of the road and therefore is south-eastern flank faces the rear garden of 16 Wimbourne Drive. That property has a detached garage at the end of the garden adjacent to the side boundary of the application property with its vehicular access from Chalfont Drive. There is a driveway to the side of the application property and a small front garden. To the rear is a garden laid to lawn with flowerbeds. The boundary treatment is an approx. 1.8m close boarded fence and a 2m fence on the eastern boundary with a shed in the northern most corner. Proposal It is proposed to construct a side/rear extension to provide an integral garage, garden room and WC at ground floor with bedroom, bathroom and store above. The proposal will include the demolition of the existing garage. There will be a small flat roof section above the front of the garage and a prism rooflight. The remainder of the side section will have a cat slide roof following the pitch of the existing dwelling. Where the side extension projects to the rear of the existing property it will extend to two storey with a short wrap around the rear elevation. It will project approx. 6.4m from the rear elevation at ground floor and 3m at first floor and will be 4.8m wide at the rear-most point. This proposal amends an existing approved extension by increasing the rear projection at ground floor by approx. 3.5m with a flat roof approx. 2.1m in height to provide for a larger garden room. That application was granted by the Development Control Committee in October 2007 under planning reference MC2007/1095.

Relevant Planning History MC2005/1774 Increase in roof height and construction of two storey side/rear extension

with dormer to side and rear to facilitate living accommodation in roof space and single storey side extension Withdrawn.

MC2006/2017 Construction of a two storey/single storey side extension incorporating

an integral garage together with the construction of a flat roof canopy to the front (Resubmission of MC2005/1774) Refused 10 January 2007 (dismissed at appeal)

MC2007/1095 Construction of a two storey/single storey side/rear extension incorporating an integral garage (Resubmission of MC2006/2017) (demolition of existing garage) Approved 1 November 2007

Representations Neighbour notification letters have been sent to the owners and occupiers of 12-16 (evens) Wimbourne Drive and 57, 72 and 74 Chalfont Drive, Gillingham, Kent. Three letters of representation have been received raising the following concerns:

• this proposal would have the same impact as that which was dismissed at appeal having an overbearing and enclosing effect

DC0902MW Page 67

• the proposal is contrary to planning policy in terms of scale, proportion and siting • concerns regarding fire fighting access – not a material consideration • the house will nearly double in size • overlooking despite obscure glass condition • the extension will be an eye-sore

Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006

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

Medway Local Plan 2003

Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal Street scene and design The dwellings in the street are mixed in design but predominantly two storey semi detached. To the front of the garage there will be an element of flat roof, which although not ideal, is not out of character with the area as the neighbouring garage at number 16 also has a flat roof. The extent of projection to the side is approx. 3.5m. This is considered in keeping with extensions visible from the street and from the rear of this dwelling; particularly those at number 14 (which extends approx. 3m to 4.5 incorporating a garage), 16 (which has a two storey side extension projecting 3.6m from the side and a garage built in the rear garden) Wimbourne Drive and number 57 Chalfont Drive (which has a conservatory to the rear). The additional projection which has been added to the application that was previously approved will be 2.1m in height and therefore will not be readily visible from the street or neighbouring gardens and therefore is also considered in keeping with the dwelling in terms of scale and proportion. The use of a cat slide roof and the wrap around to the rear respects the character of the existing property. Therefore the proposal complies with the objectives of Policies QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and with regards to the impacts on street scene and design. Neighbours’ amenities Number 57 is situated to the northwest of the application site and away from the extension. In terms of impact upon sunlight and daylight the extension will have no impact due to the path of the sun and siting of the extension. Due to the distance away from the shared boundary with this property of approx. 4.5m there will be no impact in terms of loss of outlook from any windows. There is one window proposed in the northwest flank at first floor level which will be situated at high level (approx. 1.8m above floor level) and therefore will

DC0902MW Page 68

minimise the loss of privacy that may have been caused had the window been situated with a normal height sill level. A condition is recommended to control the alteration of this window or the introduction of any additional windows to ensure no overlooking is introduced at a later date. At ground floor level there will be one door that will face the boundary treatment with number 57 Chalfont Drive. The distance between this door and the boundary is approx 4.5m and the boundary treatment is approx. 1.8m high; therefore it is considered that any loss of privacy to this neighbour would be minimal. Number 16 Wimbourne Drive is situated to the southeast of the application site at a lower level (approx. 0.3-0.5m) and is situated on the corner plot with a two storey side extension which projects 3.6m from the side. This property has a small rear garden made smaller than the original garden by the garage built at the end. There are windows in the rear elevation of this property facing the application site. The development proposes one door and one window in the southeastern flank serving the garage. The height of the boundary treatment is considered sufficient to screen this window which is to be fitted with obscure glass and overcome any concerns with regards to perceived overlooking. The ground floor windows of number 16 are considered sufficiently screened from the proposal by the existing boundary treatment and their own existing garage. The height of the proposal of approx. 2.4m sloping up to meet the original roof is not considered to cause any detrimental impact to outlook to both ground floor and first floor windows despite the change in land levels. There will be five rooflights in the roof slope which will be high level and do not serve habitable rooms. There will be one rooflight situated in the flat garage roof. As none of these windows enjoy any outlook due to being situated at high level and that they serve non-habitable rooms they are not considered to cause any loss of privacy for this neighbour. Due to the path of sun rising in the east and setting in the west there will be no detrimental impact to this neighbour in terms of loss of sunlight or daylight. Number 14 Wimbourne Drive is situated to the east of the application site at a lower level (approx. 0.3-0.5m) and has a single storey rear extension which projects approx. 3m from the rear. This extension has resulted in the loss of garden space for this property. Number 14 has bedroom windows in the rear elevation that currently overlook the rear garden of the application site. The proposed extension will project adjacent to part of the rear of number 14 where the boundary treatment is approx. 2m high close boarded fencing. The extension will be situated approx. 1.1 and 1.9m away from the shared boundary with Number 14. Due to the height and distance away of the extension, it is not considered to cause any loss of outlook from any windows in this property. There are proposed one door and one window in the southeastern flank serving the garage however due to the height of the boundary treatment and as they serve a garage they are not considered to cause any loss of privacy to this neighbour. As above, the proposed rooflights in the roof plane will be high level and not serve habitable rooms; therefore there will be no detrimental impact on this neighbour in terms of privacy. There will be one window in the rear elevation at first floor level to serve a bedroom however the garden is approx. 19m long and the boundary treatment is considered sufficient to prevent any overlooking to the rear of the property from the extension. The additional 3.5m projection to the rear will be approx. 2.1m in height. The boundary treatment between the applicants property and neighbouring dwelling is approx. 2 metres high. The proposed extension will be set away from the boundary to the rear which will aid in screening the proposal from neighbouring dwellings. Due to the height of the extension it is not considered that there will be any detrimental impact on any neighbouring properties in terms of loss of sunlight, daylight, outlook or privacy.

DC0902MW Page 69

Therefore the proposal complies with the objectives of Policies QL1 of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 and BNE2 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 with regards to the impacts on neighbours’ amenities. Highways The proposed extension will increase the number of bedrooms from three to four however it will not result in the loss of off road parking or garage space. Two off street car parking spaces will remain with the availability of on street parking to accommodate a further vehicle. Therefore no objection is raised on highways grounds. Conclusions and Reasons for Approval The design of the proposed development will be in keeping with the character and appearance of the street scene, and there are likely to be no adverse effects on the amenities of neighbouring properties or future occupiers, or on highway safety. As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable and the application therefore accords with the provisions of Policies QL1 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE1, BNE2 and T13 of the adopted Local Plan. The application is accordingly recommended for approval. This application would normally fall to be determined under delegated powers, but is being reported for Members consideration due to the number of representations received contrary to the recommendation.

DC0902MW Page 70

11 MC2008/0993

Date Received: 12th June 2008

Location: OBCU Club 13-15 High Street Brompton Gillingham ME7 5AA Proposal: Retrospective application for raising of land levels Applicant: Mrs S Spokes OBCU Club Limited 13-15 High Street Brompton

Gillingham Kent ME7 5AA Agent: Ward: River Recommendation - Approval with Conditions 1 Prior to their first use on site details of any external lighting or heating on or of the

raised area and shelter hereby approved (excluding the existing lights attached to the main club building) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained as such.

For the reasons for this recommendation for approval please see the Planning Appraisal section and conclusion at the end of this report.

Site Description 13-15 High Street is a three-storey building in use as a private members club. The main building is imposing with many period features, although to the rear there is a nondescript modern single-storey extension with a flat roof. To the side of the building there is a parking area, separated from the rear yard by some wooden gates. The rear area is enclosed by a mix of walls and fences of varying heights. It is entirely hard surfaced and is partly used as a sitting-out area for the club. The property is located within Brompton Lines Conservation Area. The street scene is mixed with many period properties of varying design and appearance. The rear of the site (subject of the current application) is bordered by the rear gardens of dwellings to the south and east and by the access road to Flaxmans Court to the north. Proposal This is a retrospective application for the retention of the current development at the rear of the site. Planning permission was granted for the erection of 4m by 5m canopy for use as a smoking shelter last year (MC2007/1083). The canopy has been built but this development included the unauthorised raising of the ground level below it and of the land directly to the south. This raised area is approached up two steps on its western edge and also by a ramp which has been constructed up to the southwest corner. Prior to the construction of the raised area the ground already sloped up slightly towards the rear/east. The raise in levels is

DC0902MW Page 71

a maximum of approximately 0.45m by the steps on the western side decreasing in height to the east. Both the area under the canopy and the open area on the rest of the raised area is set out with tables and chairs.

Relevant Planning History NK3/50/275/9668 Alterations and additions to existing premises. Approved 26 January 1951 NK3/50/275A Club lounge extension and installation of new toilets, loading access and

car parking Approved 2 August 1971 88/AT6 Illuminated projecting sign Refused 13 October 1988 MC2007/1083 Construction of canopy to rear for use as smoking shelter and 1.8 metre

high gates to front Approved 16 August 2007 Representations The application has been advertised on site and in the press and the owners/occupiers of 2, 4 & 6 Garden Street, 7, 7a, 12, 12a, 12b, 14, 17 and 17a High Street have been notified by letter. The Brompton Conservation Association has confirmed that it regrets that it has not been engaged in this application. It seeks to improve the appearance of the Conservation Area at the same time as respecting that circumstances change and therefore that buildings need to be altered. It notes that the construction and particularly its scale and level give rise to a considerable change in conditions for neighbouring properties especially 2 Garden Street and therefore urges the planning authority to pay appropriate attention to objections raised by these neighbouring properties. 19 letters of objection together with a number of further representations from one of these objectors have been received, in summary raising the following areas of concern:

• the local community did not have enough information to properly consider the previous application and the current application should be rejected in its entirety, design differs to that which was originally applied for and given consent and the drawings are inaccurate, it affects Brompton more widely than just the immediate neighbours who were notified, some neighbouring properties are in multiple occupancy and so there are unlikely to be the same concerns as for owner occupiers, 2 Garden Street was not informed of the previous application

• the Club seems to have shown contempt for the planning process and to neighbours • it is not in the interests of the local community, allowing smokers and drinkers to

congregate at the backs of local houses, the smoking ban has caused public nuisance in the area, pushing smokers outside and causing noise pollution and a loss of privacy

• fear that the shelter will turn into a beer garden with further lack of privacy and noise nuisance

DC0902MW Page 72

• the structure is not temporary or removable and is likely to become a long term fixed structure within the Conservation Area

• implications for/adverse impact on the Brompton Community/Conservation Area and proposed World Heritage Site including given the number of sites in Brompton where similar could occur

• adverse impact on the environment including trees surrounding the site • loss of privacy including to bathroom windows to 2 Garden Street • noise and disturbance including particular detrimental to the use of top floor bedroom

and garden of 2 Garden Street, noise gets louder as the night progresses, includes use until after 11pm

• loss of outlook, destruction of views • loss of light • reduction in parking area at the club with additional pressure on local parking provision

which is already inadequate • disabled ramp would not be needed if the ground had not been raised, use of the ramp

would create noise, vibration, damage to wall and further encroachment on privacy, use by children to run up and down will cause more noise and disturbance and it is a security risk, a platform to get to neighbouring properties

• the raised area connects to neighbours back wall and so is very close to his property • lighting and floodlights cause glare into neighbouring properties • it would be preferable to have an awning behind the toilets and to provide new wooden

gates to this area • the lowering of the shelter would go some way to mediating the problems experienced

(including by taking it out of view of the bathroom of 2 Garden Street) • otherwise the ground should be lowered and the shelter shortened, it should not be

used after 10pm, spot lights should be removed or altered so as not to floodlight neighbours property, tables and chairs should be under the shelter only and not else where, the whole structure needs to be rebuilt as it is of poor quality, locals should be consulted more thoroughly

• request to speak at Committee and that a planning officer and the committee visit 2 Garden Street to view the nuisance

• concern that the OBCU club is a Conservative Club and that council members may belong and be in a position to influence council planning decisions at committee.

1 letter confirming no objections to the scheme has been received. One of the objectors has responded to this in detail, including reference to the writer not living adjacent to the site, being a landlord rather than a resident. Development Plan Policies Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 Policy EN9 (Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows)

Policy QL1 (Quality of Development and Design) Policy QL6 (Conservation Areas) Policy TP19 (Parking Standards) Medway Local Plan 2003 Policy BNE1 (General Principles for Built Development) Policy BNE2 (Amenity Protection)

DC0902MW Page 73

Policy BNE3 (Noise Standards) Policy BNE5 (Lighting) Policy BNE12 (Conservation Areas) Policy BNE14 (Development in Conservation Areas) Policy BNE43 (Trees on Development Sites)

Policy R10 (Local Centres, Village Shops and Neighbourhood Centres) Policy T13 (Parking Standards)

Planning Appraisal Background A planning application for the construction of a canopy for use as smoking shelter on this site was submitted last year (MC2007/1083). Consultations were undertaken by site and press notices and by letters to the nearest neighbouring properties in the usual manner. No representations were received, the application was assessed with regard to the relevant planning policies and other material considerations and the application was approved. Subsequent to this a minor change to the finished design of the canopy was agreed, this being the design of the canopy now on site. However prior to the erection of the canopy on site the section of land in the southeast corner of the rear of the site (approximately 10m by 6m) was raised in level, with the canopy being constructed in the agreed position but on this now raised land. Following complaints and planning enforcement investigation the current application has been submitted in an attempt to regularise this situation. The site is located in Brompton High Street and is allocated as being within a Local Shopping Centre by Policy R10 of the Local Plan. Visual Impact including Impact on Conservation Area As assessed at the time of the last application the canopy is of a simple functional design, appearing as a timber pergola with polycarbonate sheets to provide shelter from the weather. Although visible from other properties it is not considered to be a prominent feature. It is only partially visible from the High Street, past the wooden gates and behind an out of keeping flat roofed single storey addition to the main club building. It is visible from the upper floors of some neighbouring residential properties but it is a relatively small addition in the context of the large existing flat roof additions to the rear of High Street buildings. In these circumstances, given the limited visibility and the relatively small scale of the shelter, it is not considered that it results in a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including the Conservation Area, despite the raised ground level subject of the current application. The development is therefore considered acceptable with regard to the guidance given in Policies QL1 and QL6 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE1, BNE12 and BNE14 of the Local Plan. Amenity Considerations As stated above a smoking shelter of this design and appearance and on the same area of the site already has planning permission. In addition the use of the rear, external area of the site by patrons of the club, for example as a sitting out area, is not a material change of use which requires planning permission. Indeed it was noted at the time of the last application that the rear yard area was already used for sitting out. At the time of the previous application it was determined that the impact of the installation of the shelter on the amenities of neighbours was acceptable in this context and planning permission was therefore granted.

DC0902MW Page 74

The only change in comparison to the scheme which already has approval is that the land level of part of the site has been raised. It has been raised by a maximum of 0.45m on the western side, decreasing towards the eastern site boundary. This has clearly had a knock on impact in raising the height of the canopy above the original ground level. However it is not considered that this fairly minor raise in land levels results in a significant increase in any noise and disturbance caused by the use of this rear area by patrons. As stated above the use of this rear area for sitting out, at either the original or the current land level, is not a material change of use which requires planning permission. In addition it is not considered reasonable to introduce planning conditions on the hours of use of the premises/outside area at this time as there are currently no such restrictions and it is not considered that the raising of the land level has made the impact significantly worse. Furthermore it is not considered that the raise in ground levels has resulted in any significant additional loss of light, loss of outlook or overbearing impact to neighbouring properties. The raised area is surrounded by a mix of high boundary walls/fences to the north, east and south and is not generally visible from neighbouring gardens. For example the canopy is lower than the boundary wall/fence with the garden to the east and is approximately the same height as the boundary wall to the south with 2 Garden Street (there is also vegetation hanging above parts of this wall). With regard to loss of privacy the concerns of the occupant of 2 Garden Street in particular have been noted although consideration has also been given to other neighbouring properties which overlook and can be seen from the site. 2 Garden Street has two bathroom windows on the first floor (clear glass period windows serving a single bathroom) and a bedroom window on the second floor above, all of which can be seen from and have views of the application site. The depth of the rear garden is approximately 14m and the boundary wall is approximately 2.35m high when measured from the raised ground level on the site. However bearing in mind that it is only the raising of the ground level by a maximum of 0.45m which is the material difference between the current and the already approved applications, it is not considered that the approval of the current application would result in any significantly greater loss of privacy to this neighbour. In particular it is noted that even when standing on the lower level of the site, adjacent to the raised area, these neighbours windows can still be viewed from the site, although of course the exact view will depend on precisely where one is standing on the site. This assessment includes consideration of the impact of the disabled ramp up to the raised area. It is noted that it would clearly not have been required if the adjacent area had not been raised in level but notwithstanding this it is not considered that its presence or use results in harm to the amenities of neighbours. Consideration has also been given to the impact of lighting in this rear area. There are two existing external lights attached to the main club building near the rear exit door and also a further one in the gated yard to the north. These have been viewed on site and do not appear at all new. The applicant has confirmed that they have been in position for years and are not a new addition or connected to the current development. Although there is no definitive evidence as to how long they have been in place it appears most likely that they are immune from planning control (i.e. that they have been in place for over 4 years). A planning condition will require details of any new external lighting or heating which is to be installed in connection with the development.

DC0902MW Page 75

In summary the impact of the development on amenity is therefore considered acceptable including with regard to the guidance given in Policies BNE2, BNE3 and BNE5 of the Local Plan. Highways and Parking There is a small parking area on the southern side of the site adjacent to the frontage with the High Street. The rear area, including the raised area subject of the current application, is gated off from this open parking area. It is still possible to use part of this gated off area for parking although only two spaces can really be provided for independent use. The construction of the raised area has resulted on the loss of potentially a further two parking spaces in this rear area although it is not clear how much this area was used for parking prior to the development taking place. The adopted parking standards give maximum rather than minimum parking space figures therefore this minor potential reduction in the number of spaces available does not conflict with the guidance given in Policy TP19 of the Structure Plan or Policy T13 of the Local Plan. In addition, at such a small scale and as the development is to cater for existing club members rather than to attract new members, it is not anticipated that this will have a noticeable knock on effect on overall parking levels in Brompton. Other matters Concern has been raised regarding the impact of the development on trees and vegetation. Although there some trees and vegetation around the rear of the site, some overhanging from other properties, it is not considered that they are harmed by the development including as the rear area was already hardsurfaced before it took place. The development is therefore considered acceptable with regard to the guidance given in Policy EN9 of the Structure Plan and Policy BNE43 of the Local Plan. Conclusions and reasons for approval A canopy for use as a smoking shelter already has planning permission to the rear of this club. The raising of the ground level under the canopy and on the adjacent area is not considered to result in any additional significant impact on the character of the area, including the Conservation Area, on the amenities of neighbours or on parking in the local area. Approval subject to appropriate conditions is therefore recommended as the development would accord with the guidance given in Policies QL1, QL6 and TP19 of the Structure Plan and Policies BNE1, BNE2, BNE3, BNE5, BNE12, BNE14, BNE43, R10 and T13 of the Local Plan. The application would normally be determined under delegated powers but is being referred to committee due to the number of representations received which hold a view contrary to the Officer recommendation.

DC0902MW Page 76