SWALE BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING SERVICES

Planning Items to be submitted to the Planning Committee

7 JANUARY 2010 Standard Index to Contents PART 1 Reports to be considered in public session not included

elsewhere on this Agenda PART 2 Applications for which permission is recommended PART 3 Applications for which refusal is recommended PART 4 Swale Borough Council’s own development; observation on

County Council’s development; observations on development in other districts or by Statutory Undertakers and by Government Departments; and recommendations to the County Council on ‘County Matter’ applications.

PART 5 Decisions by County Council and the Secretary of State on

appeal, reported for information PART 6 Reports containing “Exempt Information” during the consideration

of which it is anticipated that the press and public will be excluded

ABBREVIATIONS: commonly used in this Agenda CDA Crime and Disorder Act 1998 GPDO The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order

1995 HRA Human Rights Act 1998 K&MSP Kent and Medway Structure Plan 2006 SBLP Swale Borough Local Plan 2008

INDEX OF ITEMS FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE – 7 JANUARY 2010

• Minutes of last Planning Committee Meeting • Minutes of any Working Party Meetings 1.1 FAVERSHAM TPO No. 3 of 2009 22 Preston Lane Pg 1 – 3 2.1 SITTINGBOURNE SW/09/1012 5 Napier Close Pg 1 – 4 2.2 BORDEN SW/08/0998 Hooks Hole Farm, Pg 5 – 8 Chestnut Street 2.3 UPCHURCH SW/09/1135 Four Gun Field, Otterham Pg 9 – 14 Quay Lane 2.4 SITTINGBOURNE SW/09/1044 83 & 93 Borden Lane Pg 15 – 18 2.5 TEYNHAM SW/09/0942 Swale Marina, Conyer Pg 19 – 23 2.6 HARTLIP SW/09/1018 3 Munns Lane Pg 24 – 28 2.7 IWADE SW/09/0755 Land off Grovehurst Road Pg 29 – 41 2.8 IWADE SW/09/0756 Land East of Woodpecker Pg 42 – 85 Drive, Helen Thompson Close 2.9 SITTINGBOURNE SW/09/1175 Fulston Manor Pg 86 – 102 2.10 MINSTER SW/09/1060 Stonnes Family Centre, Pg 103 – 106 Halfway Road 2.11 BOBBING SW/09/0972 Land adj Upper Toes, Pg 107 – 118 Sheppey Way 2.12 LEYSDOWN SW/09/1103 Land South of Leysdown Road, Pg 119 – 128 2.13 BOUGHTON SW/09/0917 Whatman House, The Charlton’s Pg 129 – 139 2.14 IWADE SW/08/1127 Land adjacent Coleshall Farm, Pg 140 – 201 Sheppey Way, School Lane 2.15 BORDEN SW/09/0825 Land off Woodgate Lane Pg 202 – 208

GP1CalloutThe property at land adjacent to Upper Toes is now known as Edentop

2.16 NEWINGTON SW/09/1061 Hillview, 104 High Street Pg 209 – 217 2.17 FAVERSHAM SW/09/1168 Morrisons Supermarket, Pg 218 – 222 North Lane 2.18 DARGATE SW/09/0899 Plot 1, Belvedere Farm, Pg 223 – 227 Dargate Road 2.19 BORDEN SW/09/1164 Land adj School Car Park, Pg 228 – 239 School Lane 3.1 LOWER HALSTOW SW/09/1083 18-20 Burntwick Drive Pg 1 – 4 5.1 SITTINGBOURNE SW/08/1338 23 Park Avenue Pg 1 – 3 5.2 SHELDWICH SW/09/0011 North Barn, Westwood Court Pg 4 – 6 5.3 EASTCHURCH SW/09/0658 Site at Appleyard Barn, Pg 7 – 8 Plough Road 5.4 SHELDWICH SW/09/0454 8 Hunters Way Pg 9 – 10 5.5 MINSTER SW/09/0060 Vicarage Road, rear of Pg 11- 14 13 Queens Road 5.6 EASTCHURCH SW/09/0165 Site at North Corner of Pg 15 – 16 Junction between Warden Road and Fourth Avenue 5.7 FAVERSHAM SW/09/0150 35 St Marys Road Pg 17 – 18 5.8 BOUGHTON SW/09/0295 Site at Oak Tree Cottage, Pg 19 – 21 South Street 5.9 BAPCHILD Case 23606 35 Doubleday Drive Pg 22 – 24 5.10 UPCHURCH SW/08/1291 2 Boxted Farm Barns, Pg 25 – 27 Boxted Lane 5.11 UPCHURCH SW/08/1260 Site at 3 The Potteries Pg 28 – 30 5.12 FAVERSHAM SW/08/1330 Site at Co-Operative Retail Pg 31 – 35 Services Ltd, Forbes Road 5.13 EASTCHURCH SW/08/1328 Site at Unit 9, Fletchers Battery, Pg 36 – 40 Swanley Farm, Warden Road

1

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 7 JANUARY 2010 PART 1 Report of the Head of Development Services PART 1 Any other reports to be considered in the public session

1.1 TPO No. 3 of 2009 (Case 11925) FAVERSHAM

Location: 22 Preston Lane, Faversham, Kent, ME13 8LF

Proposal: Objection to TPO No. 3 of 2009 Applicant/Agent: Mrs Diana Norman, The Sycamores, 22 Preston Lane,

Faversham, Kent, and Mr R Stringer, 24 Preston Lane, Faversham, Kent

Description of Proposal This report relates to objections made in regard to a Tree Preservation Order made on 25 September 2009 to protect one Sycamore tree growing within the rear garden of 22 Preston Lane, Faversham. The tree is shown as T1 Sycamore on the Tree Preservation Order map. The Order was made on the following ground:

“Policy E10 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 states that the Borough Council will seek the protection of important trees in the local landscape. The Sycamore tree is a healthy maturing specimen, which contributes significantly to the amenity of the area. A Section 211 Notice has been submitted to fell the Sycamore tree which in the Council’s view would be detrimental to the character of the area. Therefore it is considered expedient to make the Sycamore subject to a TPO in order to secure its long-term retention.”

Relevant Site History and Description The Sycamore T1 is growing within the rear garden of 22 Preston Lane, Faversham. It is a healthy, mature specimen that is clearly visible from various surrounding public areas making it contribute significantly to the visual amenity of the area. On 25 September 2009 Tree Preservation Order No. 3 of 2009 was made to protect 1 Sycamore growing within the rear garden of 22 Preston Lane, following the Council’s receipt of a Section 211 Notice under the Conservation Area Legislation giving six weeks Notice of intent to have the Sycamore felled.

Continued . . .

2

1.1 (Contd) PART 1

Other Representations One letter of objection has been received from the tree owner Mrs Diana Norman of The Sycamores, 22 Preston Lane. An e-mail of objection has also been received from the neighbour Mr Stringer of 24 Preston Lane, Faversham. This e-mail was originally sent to support the proposal to fell the tree, but the writer has confirmed that he wishes these comments to be read as an objection to the Order. Their comments can be summarised as follows:

• Due to the tree’s height and size the garden and rear of the property suffers greatly from lack of light.

• The tree is not a particularly attractive and by its nature is not a threatened species.

• The tree produces a slimy substance that covers garden furniture and ornaments that is impossible to remove.

• The tree deposits, leaves, seeds and flowers by the millions. • There is concern that if the tree was to fall or branches snap, they

would cause severe damage to nearby properties.

Views of Consultees The Council’s Tree Officer supports the confirmation of the Tree Preservation Order, and considers the tree to be of appropriate amenity value to justify the order. He states that ‘upon inspection the Sycamore was clearly visible from various public areas thus making it contribute significantly to the amenity of the local area.

Planning Policies Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. Policy E1 which addresses General Development Criteria Policy E10 which refers to the Protection of Trees Discussion The Sycamore numbered T1 on the TPO plan is a mature specimen growing within the rear garden of 22 Preston Lane, Faversham. The Council’s Tree Officer has viewed the tree from the surrounding roads and concluded that it is of sufficient quality to be included within the Order. At the time of his inspection the Sycamore exhibited no major defects other than the presence of some minor dead branches which are not unexpected on a tree of this age and size. The removal fo the dead wood can be undertaken without the need for a formal application to be submitted to the Council although at least five working days notice is to be given prior to undertaking of such work.

Continued . . .

3

1.1 (Contd) PART 1

Unfortunately, many of the complaints listed by Mrs Norman and her neighbour, Mr Stringer, such as falling leaves, seeds and blockage of light are all common problems when living near to large mature trees and whilst they can be an inconvenience they are not considered sufficient reasons to remove healthy prominent trees. Therefore, whilst I note the concerns and objections raised by Mrs Norman and her neighbour Mr Stringer, I do not consider they amount to sufficient cause not to confirm the Tree Preservation Order. I consider the tree in part to contribute to the visual amenity of the streetscene and surrounding area. Recommendation I consider the tree contributes significantly to the character of the streetscene being visible from various viewpoints along the surrounding roads. I therefore recommend that the Tree Preservation Order be confirmed as soon as possible.

___________ Responsible Officer: Graham Thomas (Area Planning Officer)

List of Background Documents

1. TPO No. 3 of 2009 2. Objections to TPO No. 3 of 2009

1

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 7 JANUARY 2010 PART 2 Report of the Head of Development Services PART 2 Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended 2.1 SW/09/1012 (Case 23839) SITTINGBOURNE

Location: 5 Napier Close, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 1RU

Proposal: Pitched roof single-storey extensions to side and rear Applicant/Agent: Mr A Taylor, c/o Mr P Brown, Hubbard & Houghton

Construction Ltd, 33 Chalkwell Road, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2LD

Application Valid: 22 October 2009 Conditions

(1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.

Grounds: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(2) The materials to be used on the external surfaces of the development

hereby permitted shall match those on the existing building in terms of type, colour an texture.

Grounds: In the interest of visual amenity and in pursuance of

policies E1, E19 and E24 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Reasons for Approval

Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that subject to compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the area or prejudice highway safety or convenience. In resolving to grant permission, particular regard has been had to the following policies: E1, E19 and E24 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Continued . . .

2

2.1 (Contd) PART 2

Description of Proposal This application seeks planning permission for the erection of single-storey side and rear extensions at 5 Napier Close, a detached bungalow within the built up area of Sittingbourne. It is proposed to construct an extension across the rear of the property, with it broken up into 3 separate ‘blocks’ as a means to keep the ridge height below the existing. The extensions will project rearwards by approximately 2.2m on the western end (off an existing rear projection), 3m in the middle section, and 3.6m on the eastern end, resulting in a staggered appearance. Ridge height of the proposed extensions is approximately 3.2m, and external materials are to match the existing. The proposed side extension will replace an existing conservatory on the eastern end of the bungalow. It will project 2.5m to the side and have a height to match the existing ridge. The extensions will provide a third bedroom, a larger kitchen, and additional living space to enable an elderly relative to live with the applicants.

Relevant Site History and Description 5 Napier Close is a detached bungalow set on a modern housing estate within the built up area of Sittingbourne. The property is set back from the road, with vehicle parking to the front and side, and features a relatively large garden to the side and rear, which backs onto the rear gardens of the houses on Adelaide Drive and Brisbane Avenue. A 2m close-boarded fences run along the boundaries. The property is roughly L-shaped with a small projection on the western end of the rear elevation, which forms part of the second bedroom. There is an existing conservatory on the eastern side elevation, which appears to have been constructed under permitted development rights. There is no planning history for the property.

Views of Consultees

No representations have been received. Other representations Three letters of objection have been submitted by local residents, raising the following concerns:

Continued . . .

3

2.1 (Contd) PART 2

- Proposed work is too extensive and totally out of harmony with its surroundings;

- Extensions will come very close to boundary fence; - Loss of privacy for neighbouring residents; - Subsequent extensions would result in the property dominating the plot; - Design – 3 rear gables resemble “a row of beach huts”; or a boatyard and

will be extremely poorly designed. - Loss of light to adjoining rear gardens. Policies Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 examines general planning considerations relating to design, amenity, parking and access, amongst others. Further to this, policy E19 states that all development should be of a high standard of design and appropriate to its setting. E24 of the Local Plan supports the above, but with specific reference to householder developments. It comments that all alterations and extensions should be of a high quality design, appropriate to the area, maintain or enhance the street scene and protect residential amenity. The Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance, entitled “Designing an Extension,” is particularly relevant in this instance. The SPG recommends a maximum rearward projection of 3m, but states that “on well spaced detached properties or where an extension is to be built away from the boundary a larger extension may be acceptable.” It also notes that “windows to the rear should be at least 21m from the windows of other houses to the rear.”

Discussion The property lies within the built up area of Sittingbourne and the principle of development is therefore sound. Whilst I note the submitted comments, I consider the proposed extensions to be of an appropriate design and believe that they sit comfortably upon the dwelling. The use of three small gables reduces the overall bulk, and keeps the resultant ridge height much lower than a single-span roof, whilst providing the applicant with a reasonably sized extension that will suit their requirements. I do not believe that the development would give rise to any serious loss of light or overshadowing for the surrounding properties, as the extensions would be set a minimum of 2.6m from the rear boundary fence and, as noted above, are not as high as the existing bungalow. Any potential overshadowing would only affect the rearmost portion of the surrounding gardens, but I do not believe that this would be any worse than at present.

Continued . . .

4

2.1 (Contd) PART 2

Furthermore, I do not believe that the works would give rise to any serious overlooking or loss of privacy for the adjacent residents. A 2m fence runs along the side and rear boundary, providing extremely limited opportunities for any overlooking of private amenity areas from the bungalows. I noted during my site visit that the upper floors of the properties to the rear were visible over the fence, but at such a distance that any intrusive views into those houses are unlikely. It should also be noted that window-to-window distance between the proposed extensions and the neighbouring properties to the rear is in excess of 21m, in accordance with the SPG guidelines. Recommendation This application seeks planning permission for the erection of single-storey side and rear extensions at 5 Napier Close, Sittingbourne. The extensions would provide a third bedroom and additional living space, and I believe the proposal is of an appropriate scale and design. I have considered issues of scale, design and residential amenity but none, in my opinion, contain or amount to a reason for refusal. Taking the above into account, I recommend that planning permission be granted.

___________ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application papers for SW/09/1012. 2. Correspondence relating to SW/09/1012.

5

PART 2

2.2 SW/09/0998 (Case 13698) BORDEN

Location: Hooks Hole Farm, Chestnut Street, Borden,

Sittingbourne, Kent, ME9 8DA

Proposal: Variation of condition (3) of planning permission SW/08/0464 to allow a 7.00am start and to allow the use to operate on Saturday mornings

Applicant/Agent: Kemsley Farms Ltd, c/o Mr David Bass, George Webb

Finn, 43 Park Road, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 1DX Application Valid: 19 October 2009

Conditions (1) No external storage of scaffolding shall take place at the site.

Grounds: In the interests of visual and residential amenity and in pursuance of Policies E1, E2, E6, E15 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(2) The premises shall not be used except between the hours of (07:00) –

(17:00) Monday – Friday and (07:00) – (1200 midday) on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays. This includes vehicle movements to and from the site.

Grounds: In the interests of residential amenity and in pursuance of Policies E1 & E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(3) The area shown on the submitted plan as loading, off-loading and

parking space shall be used for or be available for such use at all times when the premises are in use and no development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or not, shall be carried out on that area of land or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to this reserved area.

Grounds: In the interests of highway safety and convenience and visual amenity, and in pursuance of Policies E1, E19 & T3 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008

(4) The area edged in red on the approved plan shall be used for the

purposes of a scaffolding company and for no other purpose.

Grounds: In the interests of visual and residential amenity, and highway safety and convenience, and in pursuance of Policies E1, E2, E19, T1 and T3 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Continued . . .

6

2.2 (Contd) PART 2

Reasons for Approval Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that subject to compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the area or prejudice highway safety or convenience. In resolving to grant permission, particular regard has been had to the following policies: E1, E2, E6, E15, B1, RC1, T1 & T3 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. Description of Proposal This application seeks planning permission to vary condition 3 on planning permission SW/08/0464. This planning permission is for the change of use of part of an agricultural building to commercial use (scaffolding storage) with associated parking. Condition 3 of this planning permission was approved by Members on 18th July 2008. Condition 3 of this planning permission is as follows:

(3) The premises shall not be used except between the hours of (07:30) – (17:00) Monday – Friday and at no time on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. This includes vehicle movements to and from the site. Grounds: In the interests of residential amenity and in pursuance of Policies E1 & E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

This application seeks to allow the scaffolding company to commence operations 30 minutes earlier than they have permission for Monday to Friday i.e. 7am. In addition, they seek to allow the commencement of the operation on Saturday mornings, 7am to 12 midday. Relevant Site History and Description The site is located in the countryside, outside the built up area of Borden, and adjacent to the Chestnut Street conservation area. The site is also within Source Protection Zones 1 & 2 of public water supply abstraction. The building in question was approved under application reference SW/01/0190, is located approximately 70 metres from School Lane, and is substantial in size. Land to the east and west is used for grazing horses and for agricultural purposes. The planning permission to which condition 3 relates is described in the section above (SW/08/0464).

Views of Consultees Borden Parish Council object to the application stating that the increased hours would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the neighbouring residents.

Continued . . .

7

2.2 (Contd) PART 2 The Head of Environmental Services has no objection to the proposal. They note that they have not received any noise complaints. Kent Highway Services have no objection to the proposal.

Other Representations No letters of representation have been received. Policies Policies E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 (SBLP) gives general guidance regarding design and amenity, amongst others. Policy E2 (SBLP) seeks to ensure that development does not cause detriment by way of pollution such as noise. Policy E6 (SBLP) seeks to protect the countryside of the Borough for its own sake by restricting unnecessary development. Policy RC1 (SBLP) seeks to revitalise the rural economy by encouraging commercial development within the rural area providing that there is no detriment to the amenities of the area. Policy T3 (SBLP) deals with traffic, and seeks to minimise the highways impacts of any new development through the provision of adequate parking, sightlines, turning space, etc. Discussion I consider the key issue to be the impact of the increased hours of operation on the residential amenities of surrounding properties. The applicant is in need of the extended hours in this case as, at times, the scaffolding company require the flexibility to be able to carryout various activities before 7:30am. The nature of their business requires them to be able to load vehicles and transport scaffolding to various locations. The additional 30 minutes at the beginning of the day will allow them the flexibility to be able to start their journeys before rush hour.

The additional time on Saturdays is also to allow greater flexibility in operating the business. The nature of the construction industry is that there is often activity on a Saturday morning. The proposal would extend the hours of operation at this site by half an hour during the week and would allow five hours of operation on Saturday mornings. The application site is some 128m from the closest residential property. Noise and activity within the application site would therefore have a limited impact on residential amenities in my view. Moreover, the application

Continued . . .

8

2.2 (Contd) PART 2

site is on a working farm that has no restrictions on hours of operation. The nature of an agricultural use is often varied and can sometimes generate a significant level of noise and activity akin to commercial uses. It is my opinion therefore, that the additional 30 minutes during the week and the additional five hours on Saturday mornings would be inconsequential in terms of levels of noise and activity at Hooks Hole Farm in general. The applicant has given consideration to the potential impact from vehicles associated with the Scaffolding company using the surrounding roads and has already put in place a policy of requesting that drivers turn right at the junction of School Lane and Chestnut Street to get access onto the A249. This ensures that the vehicles travel past far fewer residential properties in accessing the main roads. Whilst this is encouraged, it is not possible to impose a planning condition to require the applicants to undertake such restrictions on vehicle routes. This is because the restrictions would relate to land outside of the applicant’s control and I consider that it would also be an unreasonable restriction in this case. This application merely seeks an extension to the hours of operation of what is an established use. Environmental health have had no complaints regarding noise from this particular use and I am of the view that the extended hours applied for would have no significant impact on the levels of noise and activity or vehicle movements to and from the application site. I am therefore of the view that the extension of the hours of operation for the scaffolding company would be acceptable in this case. Summary and Recommendation Having considered the comments from the Parish Council, consultees and the relevant Development Plan Policies, I am of the view that the extension of the hours of operation to the scaffolding business would have no significant detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the surrounding properties. Taking the above into account I recommend that planning permission be granted for the variation of condition (3) of planning permission SW/08/0464..

___________ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application papers for SW/09/0998. 2. Correspondence relating to SW/09/0998. 3. Application papers for SW/08/0464. 4. Correspondence relating to SW/08/0464.

9

PART 2 2.3 SW/09/1135 (Case 16772) UPCHURCH

Location: Four Gun Field, Otterham Quay Lane, Upchurch, Nr

Sittingbourne, Kent, ME8 8QP

Proposal: Retrospective application for non-illuminated business sign

Applicant/Agent: Rainham Recycled Aggregates, c/o Kingsley Smith,

Chartered Surveyors, Rawscombe Farmhouse, Cuxton, Kent, ME2 1LA

Application Valid: 12 November 2009

Conditions (1) No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the

owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

(2) No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to:

(a) endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock,

harbour or aerodrome (civil or military); (b) obscure; or hinder the ready interpretation of, any traffic sign,

railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air; or (c) hinder the operation of any device used for the purpose of

security or surveillance or for measuring the speed of any vehicle.

(3) Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of

advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.

(4) Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of

displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a condition that does not endanger the public.

(5) Where an advertisement is required under these Regulations to be

removed, the site shall be left in a condition that does not endanger the public or impair visual amenity.

(6) The sign hereby approved shall not be illuminated. Continued . . .

10

2.3 (Contd) PART 2 Grounds: In the interests of visual amenity and the character and

appearance of the area, in pursuance of Policies E1, E6 & E23 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Description of Proposal

This application seeks retrospective advertisement consent for a non-illuminated business sign at Four Gun Field, Otterham Quay Lane, Upchurch. The sign is located at the entrance to the site, set back off the road. It is on poles, is a total of 4 metres in height and the sign itself is 2.440m wide and 1.22m high. The sign advertises “Rainham Recycled Aggregates” and is a mix of white lettering on a green background and green lettering on white. Relevant Site History & Description The site is located in the countryside, in a locally important gap, outside the built up area of Upchurch. The site is currently used as an unauthorised aggregate crushing waste use, and has been enclosed by a high fence. The use, together with the fencing and all other ancillary development within the site is the subject of an enforcement notice issued by Kent County Council (the relevant planning authority). A subsequent appeal against the Enforcement Notice has been dismissed, but the appellant has challenged the decision of the Planning Inspectorate in the High Court. At the time of writing, a date has not been set for the hearing. The planning history is as follows: A Certificate of Lawful Existing Use was issued by the Council in 1999 under reference SW/98/0692 for the use of the site for ‘the purposes of a brickworks including ancillary open storage of materials related to the use of the land in question and adjacent land as a brickworks, all within class B2 of Part B of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987.’

A subsequent application (reference SW/00/0204) for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use for the same use, but for a wider area of land (including the area covered by the approved scheme, with additional land to the east) was submitted in 2000. The Council did not determine the scheme, and the application was the subject of an appeal against non-determination. At appeal, the Planning Inspector issued a certificate for a slightly larger area of land than approved by the Borough Council, but substantially less than that sought by the application.

Outline planning permission was refused for residential development of the site under application SW/00/0101. A subsequent appeal was dismissed. Planning permission was granted for a new access under reference SW/00/0298.

Continued . . .

11

2.3 (Contd) PART 2

Views of Consultees Kent Highway Services raise no objection, and an extract from their comments is as follows:

“Under the development control protocol, KHS would not expect to be consulted on this application. However, I understand that objectors have raised highway concerns over the sign, and you therefore wish to seek the comments of the Highway Authority to obtain a professional opinion. The sign is located within the grounds of the applicant, and does not obstruct any vision splays required for highway safety. The content and form of the sign is also not likely to cause any distraction.”

Upchurch Parish Council raise objection, stating that they feel it is

inappropriate in this rural location. The Parish Council also considers the business to be inappropriate.

Other Representations Nine letters/emails of objection have been received. Many of the comments relate to the current unlawful use of the site, the ancillary structures on it, including a CCTV camera, the fencing that surrounds the site, and the perceived lack of action relating to the unauthorised use by Swale Borough Council, Kent County Council and the Environment Agency. As stated above, the unauthorised use and ancillary structures are the subject of enforcement action by Kent County Council. Furthermore, they are not material considerations in determining this application for advertisement consent, and I address this in the discussion section below. The remaining contents of the representations are summarised as follows:

• The sign has already been erected; • The sign is excessively tall; • The applicants have no regard to local residents; • The sign is visible from windows of a number of dwellings opposite the

site; • The colours used are not in-keeping with the rural area; • The sign is an eyesore; • The sign adds to the harm to the countryside caused by the wider site; • The sign affects one writer’s enjoyment of their property, contrary to the

Human Rights Act; • The sign adds to the erosion of the strategic gap; • The sign advertises an unlawful use; • Forcing the applicants to appeal will cause them to waste money,

which one writer considers appropriate; • The sign is unnecessary;

Continued . . .

12

2.3 (Contd) PART 2

• The poles on which the advert stands require planning permission; • Swale Borough Council should be seen to be supporting the local

community by requiring the sign to be removed; • Otterham Quay Lane has been the area of a number of bicycle, vehicle

and pedestrian accidents (including fatal accidents). The sign is a distraction and will add to the existing highway danger;

• Lorries accessing the site cause a highway hazard; • Lorries turning to read the sign cause harm to highway safety.

No other representations have been received.

Policies The following Policies are relevant:

Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 E1 General Development Criteria E6 The Countryside E7 The separation of settlements E19 Achieving High Quality Design and Distinctiveness E23 New Shopfronts, Signs and Advertisements The Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled “The Design of Shopfronts, Signs and Advertisements” is also pertinent.

Discussion

I share residents concerns regarding the wider use of the site, and am in little doubt that it causes substantial harm to their residential amenity. However – all of the development of the site is the subject of enforcement action by the County Planning Authority (the appropriate planning authority for the type of use carried out on the site) and in law cannot be the subject of enforcement action by the Borough Council. With regards the lawful use of the site – this is for Class B2 (General Industrial) uses, as dictated by the two lawful development certificates issued. In determining applications for certificates of existing lawful use or development, the Council cannot consider the planning merits (such as noise and disturbance, dust, or any other harm to amenity) of the use, and is restricted to considering only whether or not the use has been established in planning terms. In issuing the certificate, the Council had regard to the history and previous use of the site. It is worth noting that, in allowing the appeal for the second lawful development certificate, the Inspector considered that “if the authority [Swale Borough Council] had refused the application their refusal would not have been well-founded.” Subsequent Counsel’s advice has confirmed that there is no opportunity to revoke these decisions.

Continued . . .

13

2.3 (Contd) PART 2

For the purposes of the advert regulations (the legislation under which applications for advertisement consent are considered) the whole structure, including the poles to which the sign attaches, require advertisement consent. No planning permission is required for this sign. Furthermore, in accordance with the advert regulations, the application can only be determined on the basis of the impact of the sign on amenity and highway safety of the sign itself. Members should therefore be clear that the sign cannot be refused on the basis of the harm to amenity caused by the current unauthorised use, or for reasons relating to the content of the sign (i.e. what it says.) Members are though entitled to consider the size, location and appearance of the sign in reaching their decision. Members will be aware that this application must be considered on its own merits. The fact that it is retrospective has no bearing on whether or not the proposal should be approved or refused. Nor should this application be used as a means of penalising the applicant. I have considered the proposal in light of the Human Rights Act, but I do not consider that it contravenes any of the articles therein. Whilst I note that the sign is tall, and comparatively prominent, it is not in my view excessively large, is located some distance back from the highway, and does not appear out of character with the area. The adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance states that signs will not normally be permitted in the countryside. However - although the site is located in the countryside, it is directly opposite a modern housing estate, and it must be borne in mind that the site has a lawful use for general industrial purposes. The sign is not illuminated, and as there are no other similar signs on the site, I do not consider that it gives rise to a cluttered appearance or to an over-proliferation of signage at the site. I do not consider that it causes harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene, nor that it has a significant impact on the character of the countryside or the openness of the locally important gap. I note the comments of local residents in respect of the impact of the sign on their residential amenity. However – the sign is approximately 35 metres from the closest dwelling, and at such a distance, given that it is non-illuminated and despite its colour, I do not consider that it has so significant an impact on residential amenity that consent should be refused. The objections of local residents relating to highway safety are noted. However – issues relating to the wider use of the site & its impact on highway safety are not relevant here. The sign is set well back off the highway, and it cannot in itself give rise to a physical threat to users of the highway. Members will note that Kent Highway Services do not consider the sign to cause a distraction to users of the highway, nor do they object on other highway grounds.

Continued . . .

14

2.3 (Contd) PART 2

Summary and Recommendation This is an application for advertisement consent for a non-illuminated sign at Four Gun Field, Otterham Quay Lane, Upchurch. I have considered, in accordance with the requirements of the legislation, whether the sign causes harm to amenity and/or highway safety. I do not consider that the sign, given its size, location and lack of illumination, causes harm to amenity, and Kent Highway Services have raised no objection on highway grounds. I therefore recommend that advertisement consent is granted.

___________ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application Papers for Application SW/09/1135 2. Correspondence Relating to Application SW/09/1135 3. Application papers and correspondence relating to Applications relating to

SW/98/0962, SW/00/0101, SW/00/0204 & SW/00/0298

15

PART 2

2.4 SW/09/1044 (Case 03608) SITTINGBOURNE

Location: 83 & 93 Borden Lane, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 1BU.

Proposal: Advertisement consent for a rectangular “For Sale” sign hung on a timber frame in a V shape.

Applicant/Agent: Greenspan Properties Ltd c/o Paul Hewett R.I.B.A.

Chartered Architect, 51 Foxdale Drive, The Dell, Angmering, West Sussex.

Application Valid: 27 October 2009. Conditions

(1) No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

(2) No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to:

(a) endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock, harbour or aerodrome (civil or military);

(b) obscure; or hinder the ready interpretation of, any traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air; or

(c) hinder the operation of any device used for the purpose of security or surveillance or for measuring the speed of any vehicle.

(3) Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of

advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.

(4) Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of

displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a condition that does not endanger the public.

(5) Where an advertisement is required under these Regulations to be

removed, the site shall be left in a condition that does not endanger the public or impair visual amenity.

Grounds: In accordance with the provisions of Regulation (2(1) of

the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) (England) Regulations 2007.

Continued . . .

16

2.4 (Contd) PART 2 (6) The sign hereby permitted shall be removed and the site restored to its

previous condition on or before 1 December 2010. Grounds: In order that the position may be reviewed at the end of

the period stated in pursuance of Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Description of Proposal This application seeks retrospective advertisement consent for the erection of a V-shaped “For Sale” sign to the front of 93 Borden Lane, Sittingbourne. The advertisement stands 1.7m above ground level, and is supported on a timber frame so that it is visible above the boundary wall. The sign is V-shaped, so that it is visible when approaching from both directions along Borden lane, and the two faces each measure approximately 1.4m high x 1.8m wide. The sign is advertising building plots for sale to the rear of 83 and 93 Borden Lane, and features the site name, a brief description and contact details. It is proposed that the sign remain in situ for one year, until December 2010.

Relevant Site History and Description The sign is positioned in the south western corner of the front garden at 93 Borden Lane, a detached house situated within the built up area of Sittingbourne. In 1978, planning permission was refused for a new access of No. 93 under application reference SW/78/0097. That application was dismissed at appeal on the basis of harm to highway safety. In 2007, planning permission was refused for the erection of 7 dwellings on the site under application references SW/07/278, SW/07/421 and SW/07/1220. All three applications were refused for reasons relating to access, the principle of backland development, lack of parking and the impact on residential amenity. In 2008 application reference SW/08/0429 sought consent for the erection of 9 houses on the site, and was the subject of an appeal against non-determination. The appeal was dismissed, with the Inspector commenting that the proposal would “result in an intensive, urban feel which would be in stark contrast to the verdant garden setting of the site and would also be out of keeping with the general character of Borden Lane”. Issues of visibility and highway safety were also noted in the appeal decision. Also in 2008, application SW/08/1148 sought permission for erection of 6 dwellings on the site. Permission was refused on the grounds of harm to the character of the area, local amenity and highway safety. An appeal was submitted for that scheme, under reference A/09/2094545, but this was withdrawn by the appellant prior to determination. Continued . . .

17

2.4 (Contd) PART 2

However, permission was granted at appeal earlier this year, under reference SW/09/0111, for the erection of 6 three and four bedroom houses and associated landscaping, following delegated refusal of the application by Officers. Further to the above, Members will recall application SW/09/0730, which was approved by the Planning Committee earlier this year. That application was very similar to the appeal scheme allowed by the Inspectorate, but with minor alterations to Plots 1 and 2 to enable use of the roof space as living accommodation. Work began on site during the summer of this year, with the demolition of the detached garage at 93 Borden Lane, and clearing of the land to the rear of 83 and 93. The sign subject to this application stands adjacent to the site entrance and, as noted above, advertises the development plots to the rear of the dwellings.

Views of Consultees

Kent Highway Services have no objection subject to the sign being non-illuminated. Other representations Six letters of objection have been submitted by local residents. The majority of their comments are not relevant considerations in determining this application of advertisement consent, but they do raise the following concerns: - The sign was erected prior to submission of the necessary advertisement

consent application; - Erection of the sign in close proximity to residential dwelling is against

article 8 of the Human Rights Act; - Sign is too large for a residential area; and - Sign is an eyesore. Policies Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 examines general planning considerations relating to design, amenity, parking and access, amongst others. Further to this, policy E19 states that all development should be of a high standard of design and appropriate to its setting. Policy E23 of the Local Plan deals specifically with signs and adverts, and states that they should “cause no harm to amenity, or compromise highway safety.”

Continued . . .

18

2.4 (Contd) PART 2 The Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance: “The Design of Shopfronts, Signs and Advertisements,” gives general guidance on the erection of signs, and should also be noted. Discussion I note that the sign was erected prior to advertisement consent being either applied for or granted but, as Members will be aware, this is not a deciding factor in the determination of such applications. Whilst large, the sign is situated back from the highway and is seen in the context of the surrounding buildings, foliage and vehicles parked on the highway. Furthermore, I believe that, whilst the sign could potentially be reduced in size, this would also reduce its visibility and effectiveness. Signs of this kind, by their very nature, are not visually appealing, as they are designed to serve the purposes of advertising rather than to be aesthetically appealing to the surrounding residents. I believe that an application for a permanent sign of similar appearance would not receive officer support. However, I note that the applicant seeks temporary permission for one year only, and after this time the sign would be removed from site. I do not believe, therefore, that this development would give rise to any lasting harmful effects upon the character and appearance of the local area. Finally, I am of the opinion that the display of this sign is not contrary to the Human Rights Act, Article 8 of which provides for the freedom to private and family life. Summary and Recommendation This application seeks retrospective advertisement consent for the display of a V-shaped “For Sale” sign to the front of 93 Borden Lane, Sittingbourne, for a period of one year. The advertisement stands 1.7m above ground level, and is supported on a timber frame. The sign is V-shaped, and the two faces each measure approximately 1.4m high x 1.8m wide. I have considered issues of visual and residential amenity, but in my opinion neither of these amount to reasons for refusal. Taking the above into account, I recommend that advertisement consent be granted for a temporary period of one year only.

___________ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application papers for SW/09/1012. 2. Correspondence relating to SW/09/1012.

19

PART 2 2.5 SW/09/0942 (Case 23828) TEYNHAM

Location: Swale Marina, Conyer, Teynham, Kent, ME9 9HR. Proposal: Retrospective application for the resurfacing of existing

access road with installation of lighting.

Applicant/Agent: Swale Marina Services c/o Peter Jackson Architects, harbour Offices, Whitstable, CT5 1AB.

Application Valid: 20 October 2009.

SUBJECT TO: As amended by drawing received 3 December 2009. Conditions

(1) Within 6 months from the date of this permission, the revised speed bump details, as shown on drawing 1089/3/01/A shall be implemented on site and shall thereafter be retained as such. Grounds: In the interest of public safety and amenity, and in pursuance of policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(2) The lighting columns hereby approved shall be so angled and shielded

as to ensure that the light falls wholly within the curtilage of the site and such lighting shall be of an intensity as set out in the manufacturers details submitted on 20 October 2009 and shall be retained as such unless otherwise agreed in writing by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interests of the amenity of occupiers and in

pursuance of Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Reasons for Approval

Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that subject to compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the area or prejudice highway safety or convenience. In resolving to grant permission, particular regard has been had to the following policies: E1, E6, E9, E13, E19 and T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Continued . . .

20

2.5 (Contd) PART 2

Description of Proposal This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the resurfacing of the existing access road to Swale Marina, Conyer, and the installation of street lighting. The existing gravel and hardcore access road has been resurfaced with tarmac and four ‘sleeping policemen’ speed bumps constructed along its length. Three new street lights have also been erected, roughly alongside each speed bump. The lights stand approximately 4m tall and feature cowls that direct the majority of the light beam downwards. The submitted Design & Access Statement comments:

“The site comprises the access road to Swale Marina. Over time the drive has become rutted and generally unsatisfactory. Gravel and hardcore had been used to fill ruts and potholes to provide a reasonably level surface for vehicular and pedestrian access. A number of vehicles were also being driven at speeds that were unsafe for the mixed use of the roadway, and were also tending to throw up an unacceptable level of dust. There had been complaints that this was a public nuisance. A public right of way exists over the drive which is frequently used by pedestrians and cyclists. The need for the works were highlighted recently when a pedestrian tripped and fell during the hours of darkness. The owners of the site have undertaken what they regard as maintenance of the road. they have done so to provide greater safety for all those using the access and its related facilities. The works have comprised laying a new 50mm wearing course of 10mm close grated tarmacadam over the existing sound tarmac road and over the worn out parts. Excessive speed of vehicles has been corrected by the use of speed ramps (sleeping policemen) substantially increasing safety, especially for pedestrians. Additionally three lights have been installed to illuminate the road, increasing safety and providing a more satisfactory route, after dark, for pedestrians. The particular design of light was carefully selected to be energy efficient and to direct its output downwards and avoid light spill…”

Relevant Site History and Description The access road runs from the junction of Conyer Road and The Moorings, in the centre of the village, down to the Marina. It was previously uneven, and surfaced with a mixture of hardcore and gravel, with numerous potholes along its length. The site lies outside of the built up area, within a special landscape area and within the coastal zone. The southern edge of the access road forms part of the Saxon Shore Way public footpath.

Continued . . .

21

2.5 (Contd) PART 2

There is no relevant planning history specifically related to the access road. Swale Marina has been operating for many years, and there have been numerous approvals for new pontoons, buildings and other alterations on the site since 1968. Views of Consultees

Teynham Parish Council has no objection. The Kent County Council Public Rights of Way Officer objects to the erection of the speed bumps along the access. As noted above, the southernmost edge of the access forms a public footpath, and KCC are concerned about liability if pedestrians trip or fall as a result of the speed bumps. The KCC officers state that, at a minimum, the entire development be brought up to Kent Highway Services adoptable standard if the speed bumps are to remain. Natural England has no comments. The Council’s Environmental Health team have no objections. Other Representations One letter of support has been received from a local resident, commenting that the resurfacing of the access has reduced road noise and dust, and that the “lighting has been well selected and does not add much to the existing light pollution.” One letter of objection has been received from a local resident, commenting that previous gravel surface served its purpose for many years, and that the new surfacing is not appropriate for a rural area. Policies Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 examines general planning considerations relating to design, amenity, parking and access, amongst others. Further to this, policy E19 states that all development should be of a high standard of design and appropriate to its setting. Policies E6 and E9 seek to afford protection to the countryside and the Special Landscape Area in which the site is located, and state that developments should protect or enhance the character, appearance and amenity value of these areas. Further to this, policy E13 affords protection to the Coastal Zone, and states that developments will not be permitted if they would have an adverse impact on the scenic quality (amongst others) of the area.

Continued . . .

22

2.5 (Contd) PART 2 Policy T1 encourages the improvement of existing accesses and the

incorporation of safety through design. Discussion Whilst the site lies within the countryside it directly abuts the built up area of Conyer, and the access road is viewed primarily in conjunction with the main road running through the village and not the surrounding countryside. I therefore do not believe that the development impacts negatively upon the character or amenity of the countryside, but rather that it has improved upon the appearance of the village by replacing a worn and rutted track with a road that blends seamlessly with Conyer Road.

It should also be noted that the access serves a working marina, and the new surfacing will provide easier access for vehicles that may be towing boats. The new street lights will also facilitate pedestrian access, and use of this part of the Saxon Shore Way, especially during the winter months.

I note the Public Rights of Way Officer’s comments regarding the speed bumps being a possible tripping hazard for users of the public footpath, and that KCC may be liable should anyone be injured. However, liability is not a planning consideration, and I do not believe that bringing the whole route up to KHS adoptable standards to be a reasonable solution. Furthermore, such works would likely include the laying of kerbstones and painted road markings, which would have a far greater visual impact.

I have discussed the matter with the agent for the scheme, who had further concerns that vehicles would drive too fast along the route should the bumps be removed, which is likely to pose an even greater threat to pedestrian safety. I agreed with the agent, therefore, that a more acceptable compromise would be for the removal of the parts of the speed bumps that lie across the public footpath, and amended drawings have been received to show this.

Summary and Recommendation This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the resurfacing of the existing access road to Swale Marina, Conyer, and the installation of street lighting. The road has been paved with tarmac, and four ‘sleeping policemen’ speed bumps constructed along its length. Three new street lights have also been erected. I have considered issues of visual and countryside amenity, and the comments of the Kent County Council Public Rights of Way Officer, but none contain or amount to a reason for refusal in my opinion.

Continued . . .

23

2.5 (Contd) PART 2

Taking the above into account, I recommend that planning permission be granted.

______ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application papers for SW/09/0942. 2. Correspondence relating to SW/09/0942.

24

PART 2 2.6 SW/09/1018 (Case 23627) HARTLIP

Location: 3 Munns Lane, Hartlip, Kent, ME9 7SY

Proposal: Part excavation of front garden to form new hardstanding for 2 cars, together with new extended crossover

Applicant/Agent: Mr M Blackman, c/o Mr D Lakeman 16 Gregory Close,

Kemsley, Sittingbourne, Kent, ME10 2UD Application Valid: 21 October 2009 SUBJECT TO: and as amended by drawing received 3 December 2009. Conditions

(1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.

Grounds: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

(2) No development shall take place until details of the materials to be

used in the construction of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interest of visual amenity and in pursuance of policies

E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. (3) 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 District Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include existing features, planting schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and numbers where appropriate, means of enclosure, hard surfacing materials, and an implementation programme.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in

pursuance of Policies E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Continued . . .

25

2.6 (Contd) PART 2

(4) All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in

pursuance of Policies E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(5) Upon completion of the approved landscaping scheme, any trees or

shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of such size and special as may be agreed in writing with the District Planning Authority, and within whatever planting season is agreed.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in

pursuance of Policies E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Reasons for Approval

Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that subject to compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the area or prejudice highway safety or convenience. In resolving to grant permission, particular regard has been had to the following policies: E1, E19, E24 and T3 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. Description of Proposal This application seeks permission for excavation of part of the front garden at 3 Munns Lane to provide an additional vehicle parking space, and extension of the existing vehicle crossover. It is proposed to excavate a 3.5m wide strip, extending from the front of the house to the highway edge, which will allow the applicants to park an additional car within the front garden area. The garden currently stands 592mm higher than the existing driveway. The existing dropped kerb will be extended, and permeable block paving laid down, although the block paving would not in itself require planning permission. The works require planning permission solely by virtue of the excavation required, as this constitutes an engineering operation.

Continued . . .

26

2.6 (Contd) PART 2

Relevant Site History and Description 3 Munns Lane is a semi-detached house set within the built up area of Hartlip. It is set back and slightly above the road, with a very narrow driveway to the side and a slightly raised garden area to the front. The surrounding properties have parking to the front and side. The properties either side of the application site have mainly soft landscaped front gardens. However, the properties to the east have fully hard surfaced frontages for the parking of several cars. There is no planning history for the property.

Views of Consultees

Hartlip Parish Council objects to the application, commenting:

“HPC notes that it would appear that there is already garaging for one car and parking spaces for a further 4 cars along the drive at these premises. HPC therefore objects to this application in its present form. HPC would prefer to see the retention of the front of the garden to protect the rural street scene, rather than the urban expanse of tarmac or brick. HPC would like to see a reduced crossover of the pavement and adequate site drainage so that water is not discharged on to the road or footpath. A scheme for parking for one additional car would be more acceptable.”

In light of these comments I requested amended plans from the agent, showing the parking area reduced to the current size. The Parish Council have been reconsulted and I await their response. I will report further to Members at the meeting. Kent Highway Services has no objection subject to the above conditions. No other representations have been received. Policies Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 examines general planning considerations relating to design, amenity, parking and access, amongst others. Further to this, policy E19 states that all development should be of a high standard of design and appropriate to its setting. E24 of the Local Plan supports the above, but with specific reference to householder developments. It comments that all alterations and extensions should be of a high quality design, appropriate to the area, maintain or enhance the street scene and protect residential amenity. Policy T3 relates specifically to vehicle parking, and seeks appropriate provision for all developments.

Continued . . .

27

2.6 (Contd) PART 2

The Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance, entitled “Designing an Extension,” is also relevant in this instance. The SPG comments that it may not be an acceptable solution to provide all of the parking at a property within the front garden, as this may have a detrimental impact upon the street scene.

Discussion I note the comments of the Parish Council, and also the advice of the adopted SPG. However, in this instance I do not believe that the development would give rise to sufficient harm to the visual amenity to warrant a recommendation of refusal. Following discussions with the agent amended drawings have been submitted which reduce the size of the proposed parking area, and leave the majority of the front garden available for landscaping. This would help to soften the impact of the development and retain the green, rural character of the area. Furthermore, I have recommended the above landscaping condition, which would enable the Council to seek appropriate planting to the front of the site that would further contribute to the appearance of the site. I am also mindful of the properties further to the east which have fully hard surfaced frontages for the parking of several vehicles. The character of this particular streetscene is therefore varied. It is unlikely that an appeal on design grounds would be successful in my view. Whilst the Parish Council is correct in noting that there is parking available to the side and rear of the site, this is very narrow and substandard by today’s requirements. During my site visit I noted vehicles parked to the side of the property, and the drivers had great difficulty in getting out due to the limited space between the house and the boundary wall. The garage to the rear of the site has very limited access due to its location close to the rear corner of the house. I would also point out to the Parish Council that the scheme does in fact only provide parking for one additional vehicle. Admittedly the originally submitted scheme was generous in the allocation of parking space, but it still only allowed for one extra car to be parked to the front of the site. The revised scheme has reduced the proposed parking area considerably, however. As noted above, I await comments from the Parish Council in response to the revised drawings. Recommendation This application seeks permission for excavation of part of the front garden at 3 Munns Lane to provide an additional vehicle parking space, and extension of the existing vehicle crossover.

Continued . . .

28

2.6 (Contd) PART 2

I have considered issues of necessity and visual amenity but neither, in my opinion, contain or amount to a reason for refusal. Taking the above into account, I recommend that planning permission be granted.

___________ Responsible Officer: Rob Bailey (Area Planning Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application papers for SW/09/1018. 2. Correspondence relating to SW/09/1018.

29

PART 2

2.7 SW/09/0755 (Case 21062) IWADE

Location: Land off Grovehurst Road, Iwade, Sittingbourne, Kent Proposal: Provision of temporary haul road (3 years) whilst land to

the west of Woodpecker Drive/Helen Thompson Close is developed

Applicant/Agent: Ward Homes, c/o Judith Ashton, Judith Ashton

Associates, The Studio, Sherbrook Cottage, Silver Hill, Hurst Green, East Sussex, TN19 7QB

Application Valid: 13 August 2009

Conditions

Planning (1) The temporary haul road hereby approved shall only be constructed

and used upon approval of the application for the residential development of land east of Helen Thompson Close and Woodpecker Drive (planning reference SW/09/0756).

Grounds: To ensure the temporary haul road is constructed only in connection with constrution of the dwellings, whereby the development in isolation would be considered unacceptable and harmful to the countryside, in accordance with Policies E6 and E8 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(2) The temporary haul road hereby approved shall cease its use either on

or before 30 December 2012, or the completion of the construction of the dwellings the subject of planning application SW/09/0756, whichever is the sooner, whereby the land shall be restored to its former use within three months of the elapsed time period or construction completion of the dwellings, whichever is the sooner.

Grounds: In order that countryside land can be returned to its lawful use and In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended and Policy E6 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(3) The temporary haul road hereby apporved shall only be used for

construction and personnel traffic connected with the construction of the dwellings on land east of Helen Thompson Close and Woodpecker Drive the subject of application SW/09/0756 or any subsequently approved scheme, or related farm traffic, and shall not be used for any

Continued . . .

30

2.7 (Contd) PART 2

other purpose whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) or the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or any Order revoking or reeanacting that Order.

Grounds: To ensure the temporary haul road is used only in connection

with the housing development or farm traffic in order to limit is usage to protect residential amenity in pursuance of Policy E1 and E6 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Ecology (4) Prior to the commencement of any works which may affect great

crested newts or their breeding sites or resting places, and widespread reptiles and their habitat, a detailed mitigation strategy shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. All works shall then proceed in accordance with the approved strategy unless otherwise agreed in writing by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: To ensure the development adequately mitigates for great crested newts that are present on the site and in accordance with Policy E11 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Environmental Protection

(5) The commencement of the development shall not take place until a

programme for the suppression of dust and noise during the construction, use and removal of the haul road has been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority. Works shall be carried out in accordance with those approved details and shall be employed throughout the period of the construction, use and removal unless any variation has been approved by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: To ensure the development does not prejudice conditions of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(6) The construction of the temporary haul road hereby approved shall

only take place between 08.00 - 18:00 hours on weekdays & between 08.00 – 12.00 hours on Saturdays and not at anytime on Sundays and Bank Holidays. There shall be no queuing of vehicles prior to the start times on the haul road any further north than the second passing place, as identified on drawing number 1408-GA-07B.

Grounds: To ensure the development does not prejudice conditions of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Continued . . .

31

2.7 (Contd) PART 2

(7) Construction and personnel traffic using the temporary haul road hereby approved in connection with the dwellings the subject of application SW/09/0756 shall be allowed only between the hours of 0730 to 1800 Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1400 Saturdays and at no times on Sundays or Bank holidays. There shall be no queuing of vehicles prior to the start times on the haul road any further north than the second passing place as identified on drawing number 1408-GA-07B.

Grounds: To ensure the development does not prejudice conditions of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Highway

(8) Details of wheel washing facilities by which vehicles will have their wheels, chassis and bodywork effectively cleaned and washed free of mud and similar substances shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority, and agreed measures shall be installed prior to, and during construction of the development hereby approved.

Grounds: To ensure the highway is kept clear of mud in pursuance of Policy T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(9) The access details shown on the approved plans shall be completed to

the satisfaction of the District Planning Authority, and the access shall thereafter be maintained throughout the duration of the associated construction works that it is intended to serve.

Grounds: To ensure that that the junction provides for safe access and

in accordance with Policy T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. (10) Before the haul road hereby approved is first brought into use, it shall

be surfaced with a properly consolidated and bound surface (not loose stone or gravel), details of which shall have been submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: To ensure that that the temporary haul road is satisfactory

and in accordance with Policy T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(11) Any entrance gates erected shall be hung to open away from the

highway only and shall be set back a minimum distance of 9m from the carriageway edge.

Continued . . .

32

2.7 (Contd) PART 2 Grounds: To ensure that that the junction provides for safe access and

is not a danger to highway safety and in accordance with Policy T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(12) The haul road hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the

visibility splays shown on the submitted plan have been provided with no obstruction to visibility at or above a height of 0.9m above the nearside carriageway level. The visibility splays shall thereafter be maintained free of obstruction at all times.

Grounds: To ensure that that the junction provides for safe access and

is not a danger to highway safety and in accordance with Policy T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(13) Prior to the commencement of the construction of the temporary haul

road hereby approved, details of a scheme of signage to direct construction traffic to the entrance to the temporary haul road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with those approved details.

Grounds: To minimise the disturbance caused to residential

amenity from construction vehicles entering the village and in pursuance of Policies E2 and T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Reason for Approval Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that

subject to compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the area or prejudice highway safety or convenience. In resolving to grant permission, particular regard has been had to the following Policies AAP9; E1; E2; E6, E8, E11 and T1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008. Discussion Members will recall this item being presented at the 5th November Planning Committee where Members voted for a site visit; this took place on Monday 30th November. The item was presented again at the 3rd December planning committee under the minutes of the planning working group. Members voted to defer the application as they considered this application must be determined together with the application SW/09/0756 and not independently. I have appended the committee report to this update; the minutes of the last meeting can be found in Appendix B to the report in respect of the related application, reference SW/09/0756, for 98 dwellings.

Continued . . .

33

2.7 (Contd) PART 2

There has been discussion regarding whether this road should serve as a permanent access to the development. This is not supported by officers as the temporary road is located entirely within the countryside where the principle of development is generally resisted, and I would be genuinely concerned with regards to amenity to residents in Cormorant Road, who would suffer harm to their residential amenity. Members will be aware that officers consider the acceptability of this application is solely for reasons that material circumstances apply in order to relieve pressure of construction traffic entering the village. In addition, Kent Highways Services stated to Members both at the planning working group and at the 3 December committee that a permanent road would also not be supported. A permanent road would require a completely different surface to a temporary haul road, where it would also be required to be suitable surfaced, drained and lit, and the junction with Grovehurst Road would be unacceptable and detrimental to highway safety and convenience. Therefore officers remain of the firm view that the application should be supported as a temporary measure only.

___________ Responsible Officer: Jim Wilson (Major Projects Officer) List of Backgrounds Documents 1. Application Papers for Application SW/09/0755 2. Correspondence Relating to Application SW/09/0755 3. Application papers and correspondence for SW/09/0756.

34

APPENDIX A ITEM 2.7 PART 2

42

PART 2

2.8 SW/09/0756 (Case 21062) IWADE

Location: Land East of Woodpecker Drive and Helen Thompson

Close, Iwade, Nr Sittingbourne, Kent Proposal: Construction of 98 dwellings comprising 25 two bed; 49

three bed; 18 four bed and 6 five bed units together with associated highway and landscaping works

Applicant/Agent: Ward Homes, c/o Judith Ashton, Judith Ashton

Associates, The Studio, Sherbrook Cottage, Silver Hill, Hurst Green, East Sussex, TN19 7QB

Application Valid: 13 August 2009 SUBJECT TO: The receipt of further information and the further views of

Natural England; and the signing of a Section 106 Legal Agreement

Conditions

Planning (1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the

expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Grounds: In pursuance of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

(2) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved

details of the materials to be used in construction of the dwellings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with those approved details.

Grounds: In the interests of visual amenity and in pursuance of Policies

E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) (or any order revoking or re-enacting that order) no fence, wall or gate or other means of enclosure shall be erected or provided in advance of any wall or dwelling fronting a highway or other front area (such as a public open space) without the written consent of the District Planning Authority.

Continued . . .

43

2.8 (Contd) PART 2

Grounds: In the inetersts of visual amenity and in pursuance of Policies E1 and E19 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Landscaping

(4) Notwithstanding the submitted plans, no development shall take place until full details of the specifications for the open space amenity land, the compensatory habitat land and the sustainable urban drainage system land as indicated in the submitted landscape statements and on the approved landscape drawings no.1395/06, 1395/01 Rev A, 1395/09 Rev A and planning layout drawings 12-1651-201 Rev F received 13 August 2009 have been submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. Details shall include the location and specifications of the play equipment; pathways and public accessible areas on all sites; hard landscaping; planting and species noting plant sizes and numbers where appropriate; soft landscaping; boundary treatments; and a timetable for their commencement and delivery. These details shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained and maintained unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: To ensure that the open space land, compensatory habitat land and SUDS land are delivered to an acceptable timetable and to a high standard of quality and in pursuance of Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(5) No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft

landscape works for the housing areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include existing features, planting schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and numbers where appropriate, means of enclosure, hard surfacing materials, and an implementation and maintenance programme. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in pursuance of Policies E1 and E9 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(6) Notwithstanding the submitted plans no development shall take place

until full details of the buffer boundary planting on the eastern boundary of the housing land has been submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. These details shall include existing features, planting schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and numbers where appropriate, means of enclosure, hard surfacing

Continued . . .

44

2.8 (Contd) PART 2 materials, and an implementation and maintenance programme. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in pursuance of Policies E1, E9 and E10 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(7) For the approved landscaping scheme, any trees or shrubs removed,

dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed in writing with the District Planning Authority, and within whatever planting season is agreed.

Grounds: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in pursuance of Policies E1, E9 and E10 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

Amenity

(8) No construction work in connection with the development shall take place on any Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor on any other day except between the following times: Monday to Friday 0730 - 1800 hours, Saturdays 0800 - 1400 hours.

Grounds: To ensure the development does not prejudice conditions of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(9) Adequate underground ducts shall be installed to the satisfaction of the

District Planning Authority before any of the buildings hereby permitted are occupied to enable telephone services and electrical services to be connected to any premises within the application site without resource to the erection of distribution poles and overhead lines, and not withstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 no distribution pole or overhead line shall be erected other than with the express consent of the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: In the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policy E1 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(10) No impact pile driving in connection with the construction of the

development shall take place on the site on any Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday, nor any other day except between the following times: Monday to Friday 0900-1700hours unless in association with an emergency or with the written approval of the District Planning Authority.

Continued . . .

45

2.8 (Contd) PART 2

Grounds: In the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policy E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(11) The commencement of the development shall not take place until a

programme for the suppression of dust and noise during the construction, use and removal of the haul road has been approved by the District Planning Authority. Works shall be carried out in accordance with those approved details and shall be employed throughout the period of the construction, use and removal unless any variation has been approved by the District Planning Authority.

Grounds: To ensure the development does not prejudice conditions of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies E1 and E2 of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008.

(12) No groundwork or construction work shall be commenced un