control board development

Civic Centre, Home Gardens, Dartford, Kent, DA1 1DRTel: 01322 343434 Fax: 01322 343422 Web:www.dartford.gov.uk

Development Control Board

Councillor D E Hunnisett (Chairman)Councillor I D Armitt (Vice-Chairman)

Councillor A BardoeCouncillor S H Brown

Councillor J BurrellCouncillor J A HayesCouncillor S R Jarnell

Councillor J JonesCouncillor P Kelly

Councillor M A MaddisonCouncillor C S McLean

Councillor D J MoteCouncillor R S L PerfittCouncillor M I Peters

Councillor L J ReynoldsCouncillor Mrs R L ShanksCouncillor Mrs R F Storey

A meeting of the above Committee will be held on

Thursday 15 June 2017 at 7.00pm at the Civic Centre, Dartford

Managing Director7 June 2017

INTRODUCTIONThe function of the Development Control Board is to consider planning applications and also to take enforcement action against breaches of planning control and related matters.

AGENDA LAYOUTReports on a planning application describes the application site, the proposed development, any relevant planning history, responses from those who have been consulted on the application along with any other comments received, and, lastly, a report on the main planning issues relevant to the application. The reports also contain a recommendation to the Board Members, generally either for refusal or approval. The recommendation appears at the beginning and at the end of each report. There is a narrative by the Planning Officer of his/her consideration and the reason for refusal, or the conditions to be attached to an approval, are set out at the end of the report.

UPDATEThe main agenda is printed some time before the Board meeting. The Update is a document which is prepared the day before the meeting and circulated to Members. It provides information about applications to be considered at the meeting which has emerged since the agenda was printed. This could include further comments from interested parties, recent changes to the application and amendments to the recommendation. Copies of the Update are made available to the public.

THE MEETINGThe Chairman and Vice-Chairman sit on the dais at the front of the Council Chamber. Planning Officers sit on their right and a legal representative and the Committee Co-ordinator usually sit on their left.

The Chairman may take agenda items in an order which reflects the degree of public interest.

The Chairman will propose each item and invite Members to indicate if they would like to discuss. If an item is not proposed for discussion, the Chairman will ask Members to vote in accordance with the Officer recommendation. However, those items where a member of the public has registered to speak against the Officer recommendation will be discussed by the Board. There will be no need for public speakers to address the Board if the speaker was going to support the Officer recommendation.

For items for discussion, the Planning Officer will usually make a presentation, describing the proposal, outlining the main planning considerations and concluding with the recommendation. Where a request to speak has been made by 12 noon on the designated date, and granted, the Chairman will invite speakers to sit in a designated area equipped with microphones. Where the Officer’s recommendation is to allow the application, the objectors will have the opportunity to speak first, followed by any supporter. The reverse order will apply in cases where the Officer’s recommendation is that the application be refused. Each speaker will be allowed three minutes to make their points.

Members or Officers may clarify any points with the speaker(s) before Members consider the application. Thereafter, no public speaking will be allowed and the speaker(s) will be asked to return to the public gallery.

The Chairman has the discretion to curtail or extend speaking in individual cases if it is considered appropriate.

SITE MEETINGSIf it becomes apparent during the Board’s deliberations on an application that the Board cannot fully appreciate the impact of a proposal without seeing the site first, Members may decide to defer the application so that a site meeting can be held. If agreed, the item will not be discussed further at this meeting.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD

AGENDA

Thursday 15 June 2017

Update

1. Apologies for Absence

2. Declarations of Interest To receive declarations of interest from Members including the terms(s) of the Grant of Dispensation (if any) by the Audit Board or Managing Director.

3. Confirmation of the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 May 2017

(Pages 3 - 6)

4. References from other committees

5. Urgent Items The Chairman will announce his decision as to whether there are any urgent items and their position on the agenda.

ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION IN PUBLIC

6. 17/00234/FUL 41 Cedar Drive, Sutton at Hone, Dartford, Kent.

(Pages 7 - 12)

ProposalThe erection of a three storey side extension.

RecommendationApproval

7. 16/00935/FUL Dale Villa, Dale Road, Southfleet, Kent. DA13 9NX.

(Pages 13 - 22)

ProposalDemolition of a front boundary wall and removal of gates and the erction of a front boundary wall and gates within the Southfleet Conservation area. (Part retrospective application)

RecommendationRefusal under delegated authority due to re-consultation requirement

http://publicaccess.dartford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OLB3AIBQ00L00

http://publicaccess.dartford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=O8IGFBBQLM700

8. 17/00507/FUL Land adjoining 34 Valley View, Greenhithe, Kent. DA9 9LU.

(Pages 23 - 34)

ProposalThe erection of a two storey house, including alterations to the curtilage and associated parking (revisions to previously approved permission DA/16/01545/FUL in respect of relocation of house).

RecommendationApproval

9. 17/00373/FUL Eebs Stables, Trollingdown Hill, Green Street Green Road, Dartford, Kent. DA2 6NR

(Pages 35 - 48)

ProposalThe provision of one additional mobile home and hard standing.

RecommendationTemporary approval

ITEMS FOR INFORMATION IN PUBLIC

10. Decisions Taken Under Delegated Powers (Pages 49 - 70)

http://publicaccess.dartford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=ON5M6IBQKJK00

http://publicaccess.dartford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OM6FJ9BQGOC00

UPDATEDEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD

15th June 2017

Item 7 Dale Villa, Dale Road. Southfleet 16/00953/FUL

NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION

An additional representation has been received. The objections are summarised as follows:

The wall protrudes too far into the highway, much more than originally (even with the obstructive rocks.)

This road has no pavement and is used by parents taking children to School after parking in the Village Car Park, often parents have more than one child, maybe a toddler or a baby in the buggy. This necessitates walking two abreast in order to hold the small child away from passing traffic, which not only includes cars but also tractors and lorries and sometimes HGV’s.

This road is also used by church goers and daily users of the village hall, including a pre-school. The unwarranted relocation of the wall further into the highway propels all pedestrians further out into an already dangerous road, made more so by the bend.

COMMENTS

The issues raised by the representation relate to highway and pedestrian safety and have already been addressed in the report in the Development Control Board Agenda.

Additional information has also been submitted by the applicant. This is largely evidence associated with the issue of land ownership, which is not a relevant planning consideration. However, additional photographs have been submitted in relation to the sightlines available from the approach to the access point, but these appear to have been taken at normal eye level, looking above the 1.5m high wall, not accurately reflecting the height of drivers, which will typically be less than 1m. In my opinion it demonstrates that it would not be possible to see, in particular, small children walking along in front of the new wall until a vehicle is protruding beyond the access point.

The issues remain as addressed in the main agenda report.

1

DARTFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL


MINUTES of the meeting of the Development Control Board held on Thursday 18 May 2017 at 7.00pm

PRESENT:

ALSO PRESENT

Councillor D E Hunnisett (Chairman)Councillor I D Armitt JP (Vice-Chairman)Councillor A BardoeCouncillor S H BrownCouncillor J BurrellCouncillor B GardenCouncillor S R JarnellCouncillor J JonesCouncillor P KellyCouncillor T A MaddisonCouncillor C S McLeanCouncillor D J Mote

Councillor J HawkesCouncillor K M Kelly

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Hayes, Mark Maddison, Perfitt, Mrs Peters, L Reynolds, Mrs Shanks and Mrs Storey

The Board noted the appointment of Councillors Garden and Tom Maddison as substitutes for Councillors Mrs Storey and Mark Maddison respectively.

The Chairman welcomed Councillor Jones the newly appointed Member of the Board to his first meeting as a full Member..

The Board was informed that Councillor Keith Kelly was in attendance as he had sought permission to address the Board as local ward Member on application DA/16/ 01137/FUL, relating to development at The Pier, Ingress Park, Greenhithe, Kent and that Councillor Hawkes was attending as an observer.

2. FIRE EVACUATION PROCEDURE AND ARRANGEMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS RELATING TO FILMING OR RECORDING THE MEETING.

The Clerk to the Board explained the fire evacuation procedure and the arrangements and constraints relating to the filming or recording of the meeting.

3. FORMER COUNCILLOR DAVID BAKER

The Chairman reported with regret that former Councillor David Baker had died following a long battle with cancer. Councillor Baker had served as a


THURSDAY 18 MAY 2017

2

Councillor for a long period and been a member of the Development Control Board for most of his tenure. Councillor Maddison asked that the condolences of the Board be passed to Councillor Baker’s wife and family. Members stood and observed a period of silence in respect of Councillor Baker.

4. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest received.

5. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 20 APRIL 2017.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the Development Control Board held on 20 April 2017 be confirmed as a correct record of that meeting.

6. REFERENCES FROM OTHER COMMITTEES

It was confirmed that there were no references from any Committee for the Board to consider.

7. URGENT ITEMS

It was reported that there was no urgent business for the Board to conduct.

8. 17/00436/CDNA LAND NORTH OF HEDGE PLACE ROAD, GREENHITHE, KENT.

The Board considered a report on an application relating to the submission of details relating to construction methodology pursuant to condition 8 of planning permission DA/12/01150/FUL for the erection of 56 dwellings comprising 33 three bedroomed houses and eleven four bedroomed houses and twelve two bedroomed flats together with associated landscaping works parking and infrastructure works.

Members’ attention was drawn to the update circulated and to an additional letter of objection which had been circulated to Board Members.

The Chairman introduced Mr Page who spoke against the application and Mr Wells who supported it.

RESOLVED



3

That the Application for the agreement of construction methodology pursuant to Condition 8 of planning application DA/1201150/FUL be approved.

9. 16/01137/FUL THE PIER, INGRESS SITE, GREENHITHE KENT.

The Board received a report on an application for a mixed use development comprising 151 residential units (16 one bed apartments, 115 two bed apartments, 6 three bed houses and 14 four bed houses), 832.19 square metres floor space - Use Class A3/A4; a 187.5 square metres training centre (Use Class D1); a development platform and slipway; boat trailer park; the permanent diversion of Public Right of Way DS1; sustainable urban drainage systems; and associated works.

Members’ attention was drawn to the update circulated.

The Chairman introduced Mr Gary Carman who spoke against the application and Messrs Tom Ashley, representing the developer and Steve Newton of the Sea Scouts, who supported it.

The Chairman gave permission for Councillor Keith Kelly, as one of the Ward Members for the application site, to address the Board on this application.

RESOLVED

That the Application be refused for the following reasons:

1. The proposal fails to provide a riverside path and has only limited public open space adjacent to the River Thames for the benefit of the other users and is therefore contrary to the open character of the riverside in the surrounding area; detrimental to the amenity of riverside users; and is contrary to the requirements of Policy CS14 of the adopted Core Strategy 2011 which seeks the provision of a continuous high quality Thames Riverside Path as well as Policies CS6 and CS17 of the adopted Core Strategy 2011.

2. The proposal results in the enclosure of vistas to the River Thames from the area the south in the Ingress Park development which has been specifically designed to provide such vistas along the streets north of Ingress Park Avenue. It is therefore considered to be out-of-character with the surrounding area and the urban design quality of the overall Ingress Park development and will also result in a sense of enclosure detrimental to the expected amenity of existing residents. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy CS17 of



4

the adopted Core Strategy 2011 and Policy DP2 of the emerging Development Policies Plan publication draft 2015.

3. By virtue of the fact that the Ingress Park development is not yet fully served by the Fastrack bus service it has not yet become a public transport orientated development as anticipated but instead has high car ownership levels leading to parking pressures in the area. The current proposal is considered to have inadequate parking provision to meet the needs of future residents and the proposed commercial units and community facilities which will have significant customer attraction much of which is likely to be car borne resulting in further pressure on parking in the local area. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy CS 15 of the adopted Core Strategy 2011, Policies DP3 and DP4 of the emerging Development Policies Plan publication draft 2015 and the Dartford Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2012.

10. DECISIONS TAKEN UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

Members received, for information, a report on the decisions taken by Officers under delegated powers for the period 4 April 2017 to 2 May 2017.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

11. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SECTION: PERFORMANCE MONITORING

The Board received a report on the activities of the Development Control Section for the quarter January to March 2017.

Members asked that Officers be congratulated on the levels of performance that they were maintaining.

The meeting closed at 8.50pm

Councillor D E HUNNISETTCHAIRMAN


15 June 2017

Reference: 17/00234/FUL Officer: Mrs B Lidster

Location: 41 Cedar DriveSutton At HoneKentDA4 9EW

Proposal: Erection of a three storey side extension

Applicant: Mrs Li

Agent: Colin Luther Associates Ltd

Parish / Ward: Sutton At Hone & Hawley P.C. / Sutton At Hone & Hawley

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval

SITE DESCRIPTION

(1) No. 41 Cedar Drive is a three storey end of terrace town house which has been extended by way of a single storey side extension and small rear extension. The integral garage has already been converted together with the installation of a first floor front elevation window.

(2) The front of the property is hard surfaced and can accommodate up to six vehicles.

THE PROPOSAL

(3) The proposal is for the demolition of the existing side and rear extension and the erection of a three storey side extension.

(4) The ground floor will have a garage and lounge, with both the first and second floors having two bedrooms and a bathroom. The total number of bedrooms would be seven for the property.

RELEVANT HISTORY

(5) 73/00672/FUL - Erctn Of Kitchen & Dining Room Extn - Approval

(6) 16/01283/FUL - Demolition of single storey side/rear extension, conversion of existing integral garage into habitable room and erection of an end of terrace 4 bedroom three storey dwelling. - Refused on flood risk grounds.

COMMENTS FROM ORGANISATIONS

(7) Environment Agency (EA) - Initially raised objection as the submitted Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) did not comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 9 of the Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework. A further FRA was submitted and the EA continued to raise objection due to the unsatisfactory FRA that was submitted. As a result of the applicants' advisor on flood risk contacting the EA they withdrew their objection as the development meets the standing advice criteria as set out on the EA's web site.

(8) Kent County Council Archaeology - Have not commented on the application but on the previous application for a new dwelling they did respond with 'No comment'.


(9) Four letters of objection have been received from neighbouring residents who comment that the proposal is an overdevelopment of the site; it would be overbearing within the street scene at the road junction; it would adversely affect the general visual amenity and ambience of the area at the corner site; it would adversely affect the adequacy of parking/loading and turning at the adjacent road junction; it would adversely affect highway visibility due to inadequate parking provision. Footpath parking already has an adverse effect on this corner of the road junction; the extension exceeds the existing footprint and its scale will adversely affect neighbouring properties; insufficient parking for 7 bedroom property; road is used to full capacity by residents and commuters using Farningham Railway station; already problems with buses and refuse collection because of traffic and parking; regular problems with the sewers; impact on street scene will be adversely affected by the increased mass, scale and loss of visual amenity.

RELEVANT POLICIES

(10) The Core Strategy, together with the Saved policies of the 1995 Local Plan, form the Dartford's development plan documents for the area and the application should be determined against these policies, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that for decision-making purposes Local Plan policies should not be considered out-of-date simply because they were adopted prior to the publication of the NPPF.

(11) The Dartford Core Strategy was adopted in September 2011. The Council considers that the Core Strategy, together with the Saved policies of the 1995 Local Plan, are broadly consistent with the NPPF and that due weight should be given to relevant Development Plan policies, in accordance with the NPPF.

(12) The Development Policies Plan (DPP) has undergone extensive consultation, following the Development Policies Plan Proposed Modifications public consultation, the Inspector completed a set of further modifications which solely concern retail policy. Limited comments have been received on this, and no other issues at all were under consideration at this most recent stage. The DPP adoption is expected summer 2017. Therefore all policies as modified, other than DP14, should be considered as holding very substantial weight in planning applications (as per NPPF paragraph 216).

(13) As such, the following policies are relevant.

Saved Adopted Dartford Local Plan 1995

(14) Policy B1 - General development guidance for all proposals;

(15) Policy H14 - House extensions;

(16) Policy T23 - Provision of off-street parking

Emerging Dartford Development Policies Local Plan 2015

(17) Policy DP2 - Good design in Dartford;

(18) Policy DP4 - Transport access and design;

(19) Policy DP5 - Environmental and amenity protection;

(20) Policy DP7 - Borough housing stock and residential amenity.

Supplementary Planning Document

(21) Parking Standards Supplementary planning Document adopted 26 July 2012.

COMMENTS

Key Issues

(22) The proposal is for the demolition of a single storey side extension and the erection of a three storey side extension to an existing three storey house. I consider that the key issues are the impact of the development on neighbouring properties; the impact on the street scene; and whether adequate parking and amenity space can be provided.

Impact on neighbours

(23) The extension would be adjacent to Water Mill Way and not immediately adjacent to any other property. The front and rear building lines would be the same as the original house and therefore there would be no greater impact on properties either to the front or the rear.

(24) The extended property to the other side of Water Mill Way is located some 10 - 12m away and set slightly forward of the application property. Given the distances and that the proposed side windows would only serve bathrooms I am satisfied that the proposal would not have any significant detrimental impacts on the occupiers of this property.

Impact on the street scene

(25) The proposed extension would occupy the same footprint as the previously refused dwelling at the site. It would be located right on the back edge of the footpath. Properties being extended close to the boundary are not uncommon in this or neighbouring streets. Indeed, the adjacent property at No.39 to the north has had a two storey side extension built close to the boundary line.

(26) Furthermore, I believe it is difficult to argue that an extension that matches the scale, design and features of the host building would appear out of keeping within the street scene when compared with, in this case, a single storey side extension with a flat roof. Water Mill Way separates No.39 and No.41, but this section of that road does not have a strong frontage, given that these two properties already have their flanks facing the highway.

(27) In my opinion, within the Cedar Drive street scene, it is the existing single storey extension that is at odds with the prevailing character of this part of the road. I should add that the principle of a three storey building adjacent to this boundary was not raised as a concern when the application for a new dwelling was refused. I do not consider that there has been any change in circumstances that it should be of concern now.

(28) Taking the above into account, I do not believe it is possible to demonstrate any likely significant harm caused by having an extension of this scale built immediately adjacent to Water Mill Way and find that the scale, design and features will not be out of keeping within this part of Cedar Drive.

Parking

(29) The parking requirement for a seven bedroom property is the same in this location as it is for a five bedroom property. If anything the parking situation will be improved by the provision of an integral garage at the property as well as retaining the existing hard surfacing to the front which is adequate for a number of vehicles.

Amenity space

(30) The amenity space for the property increases slightly to the existing level of amenity space due to the loss of the small single storey rear extension.

(31) The amenity space will be in excess of 120 square metres. It will be of regular shape, directly accessible from the property and receive sunlight for part of the day. As such I am satisfied that the useable garden provision is acceptable.

Other issues

(32) The concern of neighbours regarding parking in the area is noted however as pointed out by one objector this congestion is caused in part by commuters and not necessarily attributed to this property.

(33) The proposed development provides for car parking spaces in accordance with the Councils Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document and as such the level of provision is considered acceptable.

HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS

(34) I have considered the application in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998. I am satisfied that my analysis of the issues in this case and my consequent recommendation are compatible with the Act.

PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY

(35) Due regard has been had to the Public Sector Equality Duty, as set out in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. It is considered that the application proposals would not undermine objectives of the Duty.

CONCLUSIONS

(36) The proposal is for a three storey extension which is, in my opinion, in character with the existing dwelling and the street scene. There would be no detrimental impacts on neighbours to warrant a refusal of the application.

(37) Adequate parking and amenity space can be provided for the size of the extension. I therefore recommend approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval

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

01 In pursuance of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

02 The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documents: 2016/042/001 B; 2016/042/101 E; Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Disposal report dated April 2017

02 For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory form of development.

03 The development shall be completed in accordance with the mitigation measures as detailed in the Flood Risk Assessment.

03 To reduce the flood risks to the occupants and their property.

04 Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved the windows in the flank elevation of the extension shall be obscure glazed with a minimum obscurity level of 3 as referred to in the Pilkington Texture Glass Range leaflet, or nearest equivalent as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such glazing shall be

incapable of being opened with the exception of any top hung fan lights, and shall subsequently be maintained as such at all times.

04 To safeguard the privacy of adjoining residents in accordance with Policies B1 and H14 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

05 The garage and means of access shown on the approved plans shall be provided prior to occupation of the building(s) hereby approved and kept available for such use at all times and no development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 or not, shall be carried out on that area of land or to preclude vehicular access thereto.

05 To ensure the permanent retention of satisfactory car parking facilities in accordance with the Local Planning Authority's standards and Policies B1 and T23 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

06 All materials used externally shall match those of the existing building in colour and texture.

06 To ensure that the development does not harm the character and appearance of the existing building or visual amenity of the locality in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

FF31.9m

BM 32.23m

WATE

R M

ILL

CED

AR

DR

IVE

WAY

STATION ROAD

WATE

R M

ILL WAY

7

27

29

113

8977

65 6397

91

26

4322

60

24

56

12

51

2

41

13

39

33

61

18

50

42

99 28

71

73

11

38

64

8 1

FF

63

WAY

CEDA

R DR

IVE

12

41

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown Copyright. 2013Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Dartford Borough Council 100025870 2013

[

Application No:: 17/00234/FUL

Address : 41 Cedar Drive Sutton At Hone Kent DA4 9EW

Date: 31 May 2017 Scale: Not to Scale


15 June 2017

Reference: 16/00935/FUL Officer: Jas Bansil

Location: Dale VillaDale RoadSouthfleetKentDA13 9NX

Proposal: Demolition of front boundary wall and removal of gates and erection of a front boundary wall and gates within Southfleet Conservation Area (part retrospective application)

Applicant: Mr S Dunn

Agent: Graham Simpkin Planning

Parish / Ward: Southfleet Parish Council / Longfield, New Barn & Southfleet

RECOMMENDATION:

Defer for Delegated refusal upon completion of re-consultation period

SITE DESCRIPTION

(1) The site comprises of a residential property which lies on the eastern side of Dale Road. Dale Villa is located within a residential cluster and is bordered by neighbouring dwellings. It is located in the Southfleet Conservation Area. The Southfleet Village Hall is located in close proximity, further north of the site.

(2) Dale Road is a moderately busy classified road and is the main access route from the north into this part of the village. It has a speed limit of 30mph in the vicinity of the application site.

RELEVANT HISTORY

(3) 02/00875/FUL - Demolition of existing buildings in the rear garden & erection of a detached 3 bedroom house. Refused on grounds relating to: impact on the conservation area; cramped form of development; and adverse impact on the open character of the Green Belt.

(4) 15/01197/FUL - Application to raise height of roof of detached garage together with erection of a side extension to provide self contained accommodation on first floor ancillary to main house. Approved in October 2015.

(5) 17/00366/FUL - Demolition of existing rear and side additions and erection of a single story rear/side extension. Pending consideration.

THE PROPOSAL

(6) Planning permission is being sought for the provision of a front boundary wall and gates. The wall has already been erected. The wall extends across the front boundary with the highway and along the southern flank boundary. The access to the property sits to the north of the site where two brick pillars have been built to secure the proposed wrought iron gates. Due to the difference in ground levels the height of the wall varies from 1.55m to 1.84m (below the pillar capping height). The wall comprises of a yellow brick with a flemish bond construction.

(7) The previous wall, shown as 'existing' on the plans, comprised of a timber fence along the southern return and a dwarf wall and railings along the front. The brick pillars and railings were set away by some 2.1m from the access. The access was secured by a post and rail style gate attached to slim timber posts which had a height of 1.9m.


(8) KCC Highways Services: The application's Existing Plan drawing is incorrect, because: (a) the front of the pillars of the old wall and fence were in line with the edge of the highway at the vehicular access immediately to the south of Dale Villa;(b) the telephone pole was approximately at the edge of the carriageway as defined by the boundary stones of the old vehicular accesses at Dale Villa and The Old Barn.The edge of the public highway boundary (carriageway of Dale Road) was the front of the old wall and railings at Dale Villa, and the boundary stones at the accesses to the north and south of Dale Villa.

(9) They advise that the submitted Proposed Plan drawing is not what has been constructed, and indeed it shows the telephone pole in the wrong position. The wall that has been constructed protrudes 18 - 20cm into the carriageway of Dale Road as defined by the boundary stones of the vehicle crossover of the access to the south of Dale Villa. It appears to the north of the site, the boundary wall protrudes 25cm or more into the carriageway.

(10) KCC are concerned that by comparison with the original vehicular access of Dale Villa the new wall reduces the visibility splays, i.e. the driver of any vehicle emerging from the driveway of Dale Villa has less opportunity to see pedestrians and vehicles approaching on Dale Road. They suggest that perhaps for this reason there is now a "highway mirror" positioned on the highway verge opposite the access.

(11) KCC highways consider that the visibility splay will also be reduced to the vehicular access to the south of Dale Villa. They confirm that although Dale Road has no footway it is used by pedestrians walking between the village and the Village Hall, and between the Village Hall car park and the school. The new wall increases the risk of accidents occurring due to the reduced visibility splays and the narrowing of the road.

(12) Dale Road is a bus route, however it is also narrow and vehicles have difficulty passing. The protruding wall makes passing more difficult.

(13) As the wall appears to be constructed on public highway it appears to contravene the Highways Act 1980 which states that it is an offence to wilfully obstruct a highway.

(14) As Dale Road has a 30mph speed limit outside Dale Villa, the appropriate vehicular visibility splays specified in Manual for Streets would be 2.4 metres x 43 metres. The splays should allow inter-visibility between the driver of a vehicle about to depart from the driveway and the driver of an approaching vehicle on Dale Road. This means that the vehicular splays should be unobstructed between the heights of 1m and 2m.

(15) KCC advise that the Kent Design Guide (Section G2, page 14) shows recommended pedestrian visibility splays, and requires visibility between the height of 0.6m-2m above the road surface across a width of 7 metres at the site entrance.

(16) Amendments could improve visibility and highway safety, but would require a substantial reduction in the height of the wall. Consequently KCC Highways recommend that planning permission should be refused.

(17) Southfleet Parish Council: The Parish Council objects as they consider that the wall is out of keeping with the character of the area and that it creates a poor feature in the street scene. They argue that the wall is too high and much higher and "solid brick" than the previous boundary treatment. They suggest that it would appear that the increased height has adversely impacted on the sight line from the access which may have led to the erection of a

pole-mounted mirror on the privately owned bank opposite (west side of Dale Road). The Parish Council request that the application is refused and the wall is removed.


(18) 16 addresses were notified by letter. At the time of writing, representations from 9 addresses have been received. 4 are objecting and 5 are in support. The comments are summarised as follows:

(19) Objections:

- The new wall sits further into the road, encroaches into the highway beyond the line of the neighbouring boundaries. The wall is now in front of the telegraph pole which was at the side of the road.

- It narrows the road. The road is extensively used by lorries and buses. - The wall is too high. - Even though there is no footpath the road is extensively used by pedestrians

including primary school children from the nearby school. - The wall makes the road dangerous for drivers and pedestrians.

- Paragraph 5.7 of the Design Access and Planning Statement says that these proposals will not reduce visibility for drivers emerging from the access on to the public highway. The solid walls and the fact that it now extends out further certainly reduces visibility and safety for the neighbour so it is hard to see how the same does not apply to the applicants.

- "The new wall adjoins my parking space and does not allow me to have a good view of the traffic coming up Dale Road."

- Parents bringing their children to Sedleys Primary School use the Village Hall to park their cars, and have to walk up Dale Road on the left hand side of the road with their backs to the traffic. The road is not wide enough to construct a pavement.

- A mirror on a 6ft pole has been erected by the resident of Dale Villa on the bank opposite their exit so that the residents of Dale Villa have vision of traffic coming up Dale Road.

- The wall means that pedestrians, including children, are dangerously walking in the road.

- Two cars cannot pass each other in the road anymore due to the encroachment on the highway.

- The railings were more in line with the Conservation Area. - The bricks are too yellow.- It does not complement the house.

(20) The following inaccuracies were reported in the representations:

- "The following inaccuracies matter because it appears that a misleading impression of the position of the old and new walls is being given. "

- The block plan and site plan are wrong as the adjoining land belongs to Dannetre not Five Ways.

- Paragraph 2.4 of the D&A and Planning Statement states that there was a 'decorative rockery along the edge of the highway.' There was no decorative highway. Some large stones had been placed at the side of the road. It also states that the old wall was set back with steps in front of it. This also appears to be inaccurate.

- "I believe that the assertion that the new wall is no higher than the piers of the old wall is not correct."

- The existing plan shows the old wall as being set back from the line of the neighbouring boundaries but it was on the line.

- The proposed plan shows the new wall as being behind the line of neighbouring boundaries but it now clearly sticks out beyond this.

- The existing plan shows a shrub in front of the telegraph pole but no shrub was planted here.

(21) The following summarises the letters of support (Although may wish to note that two of these representations are from outside of Southfleet):

- I live in the property next door to Dale Villa and fully support the wall. It looks much cleaner than the old dilapidated wall and rocks and provides a better gauge for cars on the road. The owners have cleared the road opposite back to the kerb and the road is now a good 1.5ft wider. The owner has been careful to maintain traditional bricks and design in its construction and I think it adds to the overall aspect of the village. It is also better for the school children who used to climb on the rocks.

- I like the wall and have experienced no problem driving past it and in fact find it easier.

- The old rocks in front of Dale Villa used to cause problems as parents let their children climb on them and they would fall into the road. It provides a nice safe walkway for the children and parents.

- The width of the road has not changed and is wider as I notice the other side of the road has been cleared.

- The wall looks like it has always been there

RELEVANT POLICIES



(24) The Development Policies Plan (DPP) has undergone extensive consultation, and following the Development Policies Plan Proposed Modifications public consultation, the Inspector completed a set of further modifications which solely concern retail policy. Limited comments have been received on this, and no other issues at all were under consideration at this most recent stage. The DPP adoption is expected summer 2017. Therefore all policies as modified, other than DP14, should be considered as holding very substantial weight in planning applications (as per NPPF paragraph 216).

(25) The following policies are relevant to this application.


(26) The following saved policies of the 1995 Local Plan continue to apply to the current application, in so far as being consistent with the NPPF:

(27) Policy B1 - Built Environment - Developments should respect and integrate with their surroundings and embrace the principles of Kent Design.

(28) Policy B8 - Within conservation areas, proposals should only be permitted where they respect the special character of the area.

(29) Policy T27 - Proposals for development will be required to make adequate provision for pedestrians.


(30) Policy DP2 - Good design in Dartford - sets out the Council's principles for good quality development and adds that in areas of additional design sensitivity and where heritage assets such as conservation areas are affected developments will need to demonstrate accordance with policies DP12 and DP13 as applicable.

(31) Policy DP3 - Transport impacts of development - development will not be permitted where the localised residual impacts from the development on its own, or in combination with others, will result in severe impacts the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and other road-users.

(32) Policy DP4 - Transport Access & Design - Proposals should include appropriate vehicular access arrangements to the new development. The conversion of front garden for car parking must include unobstructed pedestrian access to the dwelling.

(33) Policy DP5 - Environmental and Amenity Protection - development must not, on its own or cumulatively, give rise to unacceptable material impacts on neighbouring uses, the Borough environment or on public health, including traffic, access and parking.

(34) DP12 Historic Environment Strategy - Development should contribute to the conservation and enjoyment of the Borough's historic environment. Proposals should aim to reflect and interpret the historic character of a site and conserve it's most significant and/or architectural aspects.

(35) DP13 Designated Heritage Assets - Development proposals affecting a conservation area should pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. maintaining and where possible enhancing significance.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

(36) The NPPF has a presumption in favour of sustainable development and advises that in relation to decision-taking this means approving development proposals which accord with the development plan without delay and where the development plan is silent granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the NPPF.

(37) Paragraph 56 advises that "Good Design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people." Paragraph 58 sets out criteria which developments should meet.

(38) Development should always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings.

(39) The NPPF also advises that the historic environment should be conserved and enhanced.

COMMENTS

Key Issues

(40) The key issues for consideration are the impact of the development on highway safety and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Highway safety

(41) The Highway Authority objects to the development which is the subject of this application due to the height, projection and solid nature of the wall which they advise significantly compromises visibility for both pedestrians and vehicles. KCC advises that appropriate vehicular visibility splays specified in Manual for Streets would be 2.4 metres x 43 metres for 30mph roads. This applies between heights of 1 metre and 2 metres above the

surface of the road, and is to allow sufficient inter-visibility between the driver of a vehicle about to depart from the driveway and the driver of an approaching vehicle on Dale Road. The new wall obstructs this splay and thereby increases the risk of collisions between vehicles leaving the driveway and passing traffic. Kent Highways advise that additional factors that should be borne in mind are that Dale Road has no street lighting and that passing traffic could include motorcycles and cyclists, both of which are less easy to see under situations of limited visibility.

(42) The Kent Design Guide sets out recommended pedestrian visibility splays, requiring visibility between the height of 0.6m-2m above the road surface across a width of 7 metres at the site entrance. The wall and pillars significantly exceed this level, thereby reducing the visibility to an unacceptable level and the recommended visibility splays cannot be achieved. I consider that the proposal reduces visibility for users of the application site, both adjacent properties and those pedestrians and drivers of vehicles who use this part of the road.

(43) This part of Dale Road has no footway (pavement), yet it is in constant use being a main thoroughfare to the village, school and residential clusters which are south of the site. Furthermore, as has been reported in the representations, parents and children regularly walk along the road between the village hall car park and the nearby school. As the village hall car park is on the same side of the road as Dale Villa, the route walked by pedestrians is along the edge of the road in close proximity to the new wall, and also crossing the accesses to Dale Villa and neighbouring properties.

(44) It should be noted that Dale Road is not sufficiently wide for southbound traffic to pass both pedestrians and northbound traffic at the same time. The only refuges potentially available where pedestrians can step out of the way of traffic are the entrances to private driveways. The potential for vehicles to exit the driveway of Dale Villa and adjacent properties with sub-standard visibility is an added potential road safety hazard and detrimental to the safety of pedestrians using the road.

(45) It is also noted that there are assertions that the already erected wall encroaches onto the public highway. KCC highways have confirmed that they consider the wall has encroached onto public highway. Encroachment is not in itself a town planning consideration, however in this instance I consider that the projection of the wall into the road does in fact further reduce the width of the carriageway and reduce the visibility splays for drivers leaving driveways at the application site and adjacent properties. This in my opinion adds to the increased risk of collisions.

(46) The proposal is I consider contrary to the Council's Development Plan which requires development to not have a harmful impact to highway safety and is therefore contrary to the NPPF which requires development to comply with the Local Plan.

(47) The applicant has been requested to reduce the height of the wall and to consider railings as a possible alternative. However, such amendments have not been forthcoming.

(48) An amendment comprising of an opening in the wall was informally submitted for consideration, however, this also was considered unacceptable by the Highway Authority as it would not have provided sufficient visibility.

(49) The applicant's agent has requested that the application be considered in light of a possible highways project for a pavement on the opposite side of the road. It is asserted that there has been fundraising on a local level. However, KCC Highways advise that it is not anticipated that such a project is planned for the near future. At any rate I do not consider that this would overcome the non-conformity with the accepted highways requirements for development affecting a vehicular access on a classified road.

(50) The applicant and agent have provided much supporting information in order to seek to demonstrate the acceptability of the development. Unfortunately, it is not considered that any of this information overrides the detriment to highway safety.

Visual amenity

(51) I consider that the new wall has a greater visual impact because of it's height and solid nature. Nevertheless, I do not consider that the provision of a wall here is so visually harmful to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area to justify refusal of planning permission. The boundary treatments along this part of the road are not consistent and therefore it may be difficult to demonstrate that the proposed wall fails to preserve the character of the Conservation Area as it would be difficult to define the character of the boundary treatments in this part of the Conservation Area. I therefore consider that the wall preserves the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

OUTSTANDING MATTERS

(52) A site location plan that correctly identifies the application site has been submitted as this report was being completed and accurate plans of the wall as erected are still awaited. This requires the planning application to be revalidated and consultations to be carried out again. The deadline for consultation responses will expire after the date of the Development Control Board meeting. If this application was deferred until the next Board meeting, it would further delay the Council's ability to take enforcement action should planning permission be refused. I would recommend therefore that officers are granted delegated authority to consider any further representations and refuse the planning application.

FINANCIAL BENEFITS

(53) Under section 75ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act officer reports to the Development Control Board are required to include a list of 'financial benefits' which are likely to be obtained by the authority as a result of the development. A 'financial benefit' must be recorded regardless of whether it is material to the Council's decision. Government advice is that the decision maker should consider whether it is a material consideration in the consideration of a planning application.

(54) In this particular case I am not aware of any 'financial benefits'.





CONCLUSIONS

(57) I consider that the development has a detrimental impact to highway safety because of it's location, height, design and length. The reduction in visibility caused by the high wall is exacerbated in my opinion by the narrow nature of this part of Dale Road and it's regular use by pedestrians, including school children, and vehicles on a regular basis, the lack of a wide footway and because of no area of refuge on the opposite side of the road. Furthermore, I feel the wall creates a visual obstruction for the only pedestrian route from the village hall into the main area of this part of the village. For these reasons I am satisfied that the development should be refused. I consider that the development is not in accordance with the adopted Development Plan or the National Planning Policy Framework, and is thereby recommended for refusal upon receipt of a corrected site location plan.

RECOMMENDATION:

Defer for delegated refusal upon expiry of consultation period for the following reason:

01 The development, due to its siting, scale and design obscures visibility for vehicular egress, detrimental to pedestrian and highway safety contrary to Policy B1, T27 of the Saved Adopted Dartford Local Plan 1995 and Policies DP3, DP4 and DP5 of the emerging Dartford Development Policies Plan.

INFORMATIVES

01 The applicant is advised to submit an amended application which overcomes the harm identified.

02 The applicant is reminded that as the works are unlawful, it is likely that the Local Planning Authority will be pursuing enforcement action.

Southfleet

St Nicholas's Church

Cottages

Harborough

LB

32.25mSedley's

34.6m

28.5m

32.5m

Village

CE Primary School

Lincolnshott

The Ship Inn

El Sub Sta

BM

Hall

ForgeR

ED S

TREE

T

Freegrove

Forge House

Russellmead

GREEN ROAD

Three

The

Cottage

Ferguson House

Buoys

Warren C

ottages

Bellevue

House

HOOK

Club

Court House

Church Cottage

CHURCH STHillcrest

The Old Barn

Memorial Cottage (Clinic)

Rannoch

Dale Villa

Church

(PH)

Haven

Five Ways

Mayfield

Danetre1

2

47

31

Church

1 2

1

1

4

7


[


Address : Dale Villa Dale Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9NX

Date: 1 June 2017 Scale: Not to Scale


15 June 2017

Reference: 17/00507/FUL Officer: Jas Bansil

Location: Adjacent 34 Valley ViewGreenhitheKentDA9 9LU

Proposal: Erection of 1 No. detached two storey house, including alterations to external curtilage, and associated parking (revisions to previously approved planning permission DA/16/01545/FUL in respect of relocation house further back and further away from side boundary with no.34 Valley View).

Applicant: Jamie Perfitt52 Birch GroveWellingDA16 2JW

Parish / Ward: Swanscombe & Greenhithe T.C. / Greenhithe

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval

SITE DESCRIPTION

(01) The site comprises of the side and rear garden of No. 34 Valley View which is an end of terrace, two-storey property situated at a bend in the road. The terrace sits in an elevated position, much higher than street level. No. 34 is accessed by several steps. The road rises to the south-east. However, the properties further east of the site are single storey bungalows. To the south and west of the site, the ground levels drop dramatically.

(02) The front and rear garden of no. 34 also has considerably changing ground levels. Part of the side garden is at a similar level to the dwelling at no. 34. The neighbouring dwellings south of the site sit on significantly lower ground. The site is prominant when approaching along the road.

(03) The general area is primarily residential. There are blocks of garages to the south which serve some of the properties.

(04) The area is well served by public transport and community and shopping facilities.

THE PROPOSAL

(05) The current proposal is for the erection of a detached two storey house to the side of number 34 together with groundworks to create an external curtilage, and the provision of associated parking.

(06) The proposed dwelling will be set 2m from the flank wall of no.34. The proposed dwelling will sit back from the front building line of no. 34 by 3.4m and will project 3m beyond the rear building line of no. 34.

(07) From the southern boundary, at its closest point, it will be set in by some 2m.

(08) The dwelling will have a width of 6.85m and a length of 8.2m. It will be two-storey, but with marginally lower eaves and roof height then the existing house.

(09) The proposal also includes alterations and terracing of the remainder of the land to provide a more a more useable garden space.

(10) The dwelling will be provided with a garage located in an existing block. A parking space is shown in front of this garage.

RELEVANT HISTORY

(11) Members may recall that they granted planning permission in February for the erection of a detached two storey house on the same site, including alterations to external curtilage, and associated parking.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

(12) KCC Highway Services: The proposal does not meet the criteria to warrant involvement from the Highway Authority.

(13) Environmental Health: Conditions regarding contamination and working practices are suggested. An informative is suggested in relation to the installation of a gas membrane and "friendly" lighting.

(14) Southern Water: Require formal application for connection to the public sewer to be made by the applicant or developer. [Informative suggested].

(15) Swanscombe & Greenhithe Town Council: The Town Council object to this application as there are no off road parking facilities proposed at the site to serve the development and seek confirmation that adequate parking facilities are being provided to serve this development.

(16) KCC Heritage-Archaeology: They advise that the site of the application lies in a general area of potential associated with early prehistoric remains, as there are known Boyn Hill Gravels either side which have potential for Palaeolithic remains. They therefore recommend a condition be imposed requiring a watching brief.

(17) In addition to the above, the following consultation responses to the previously approved application are relevant:

Environment Agency: No objections raised.

Thames Water: Informative suggested regarding waste and water pressure.


(18) Neighbours and contributors from the previously approved application were notified. At the time of writing, 2 representations have been received from neighbouring residents. Their comments are summarised as follows:

(19) The resident of 32 Valley View (adjacent property, which sits back from the site) raises concerns that the application proposes moving the new house nearer to their property than the current approval. They are concerned that as this is directly adjacent it will have a significant effect on the view from the front of their house. They are also concerned that the plans do not appear to incorporate a section of land beside the property next to the steps which has been left outside the fence of 34 and untended for some years and results in weeds and shrubs overgrowing and destroying the boundary wall of the steps.

(20) The resident from 48 Valley View advises that their only concern is parking. They query where the residents of no 34 are going to park as the garage is to be available for the proposed dwelling.

RELEVANT POLICIES



(23) Following the Development Policies Plan Proposed Modifications pubic consultation, the Inspector moved on and completed a set of further modifications which solely concern retail policy. Limited comments have been received on this, and no other issues at all were under consideration at this most recent stage. Plan adoption is expected summer 2017. Therefore all policies as modified, other than DP14, should be considered as holding very substantial weight in planning applications (as per NPPF paragraph 216).

(24) The following policies are relevant to this application.

Adopted Dartford Core Strategy 2011

(25) Policy CS1 - Spatial Pattern of Development - identifies where growth will take place. This policy seeks to promote sustainable patterns of development.

(26) Policy CS10 - Housing Provision - Advises that planning applications for sites not identified as deliverable or developable in the SHLAA will be assessed in the same way as planned development by consideration of the sustainability of the site for housing development; whether the benefits of development outweigh disbenefits; and the capacity of the current and proposed infrastructure to serve the development.

(27) Policy CS11 - Confirms that the Council will work to achieve the delivery of a balanced relationship between homes, jobs and infrastructure from the outset of development through seeking financial contributions for infrastructure delivery and by working with service providers.

(28) Policy CS15 - Managing Transport Demand seeks to minimise car use and make the most effective use of the transport network.

(29) Policy CS17 - Design of Homes seeks to achieve quality living environments and requires the application of the principles of Kent Design. It sets criteria for the design of homes including appropriate internal spaces and useable private amenity space.

(30) Policy CS18 - Housing Mix requires that developments of less than 100 houses should provide a majority of family housing.


(31) The following saved policies of the 1995 Local Plan continue to apply to the current application, in so far as being consistent with the NPPF:

(32) Policy B1 - New Development - a high standard of design will be required in all development proposals, embracing the principles of Kent Design with particular regard to form, massing and scale and associated inter-relationships. Materials should be of good quality, appearance and durability. Development should not materially detract from the amenity of adjoining properties.

(33) Policy B3 - Appropriate hard and soft landscaping should be incorporated and existing trees retained wherever possible.

(34) Policy T23 - Parking - development proposals should include adequate off-street parking.

(35) Policy H12 - Proposals which adversely affect residential amenity or are unneighbourly will not be permitted.

Emerging Dartford Development Policies Plan (DDPP)

(36) Policy DP1 - Dartford's Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development.

(37) Policy DP2 - Requires good quality design.

(38) Policy DP3 - Transport impacts of development - developments should not give rise to severe local residual impacts in terms of traffic congestion, air quality, safety and pressure for on-street parking.

(39) Policy DP4 - Transport Access and Design - Requires provision to be of an appropriate standard and requires development to be in accordance with the adopted Parking Standards SPD.

(40) Policy DP5 - Environmental and Amenity Protection - development must not, on its own or cumulatively, give rise to unacceptable material impacts on neighbouring uses, the Borough environment or on public health.

(41) Policy DP7 - Borough Housing Stock & Residential Amenity - states that inappropriate development on residential garden land will be resisted. Proposals will only be permitted where it is shown development would not result in harm (individually or cumulatively) and includes loss of choice and diversity in the stock of housing and gardens, erosion of local character and material impacts on residential amenity.

(42) Policy DP8 - Residential Space & Design in New Developments - highlights that new development should provide adequate internal and external amounts of space.

(43) Policy DP11 - Sustainable Technology & Construction - Development should be designed to tackle climate change, minimise flood risk and natural resource use and aim to increase water efficiency.

(44) Adopted Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document

(45) Adopted Housing Windfall Supplementary Planning Document


(46) The NPPF has a presumption in favour of sustainable development and advises that in relation to decision-taking this means approving development proposals which accord with the development plan without delay and where the development plan is silent granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the NPPF.

(47) Paragraph 56 advises that "Good Design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people." Paragraph 58 sets out criteria which developments should meet.

(48) Under paragraph 53, the NPPF states that the Local planning authorities should consider the case for setting out policies to resist inappropriate development of residential gardens, for example where development would cause harm to the local area. The NPPF glossary, when defining Previously Developed Land (PDL), excludes residential gardens.

COMMENT

Key Issues

(49) This application is a re-submission of one previously approved. The main revision for which permission is being sought is the re-siting of the proposed dwelling. It is not considered that the changes in the siting affect the principle of development which has already been accepted. The key issues for consideration are in my opinion; whether the principle of the proposal still complies with the adopted Local Plan; the acceptability of the proposal in relation to the character of the locality; impact to neighbouring amenity; standard of accommodation; and parking considerations.

The principle of development

(50) The principle of development on this garden land has been established by the planning permission already granted. I am satisfied that there have been no changes to the circumstances which Members considered in February. Policy DP7 allows for infill development where this is not considered to have harmful effects in terms of erosion of local amenity character and negative impact of residential, these matters are considered further below. The site is considered to be a sustainable location within the urban area, well-related to services and community facilities and close to good public transport links. The proposal is therefore still considered to meet the objectives of Policy CS10 relating to windfall sites.

Character of the locality

(51) The surrounding area is predominantly residential. It is characterised by generously sized dwellings on relatively compact sites, with modest gardens which are grouped in small terraces and pairs of properties. The existing dwellings in the locality do not have a great deal of separation between them. However the application site has a garden of significantly larger size. This garden land is also visible from a distance along the road and therefore the siting and design of the proposed dwelling with regard to character of the street scene is important in my opinion.

(52) The proposed dwelling will in my opinion match the prevailing character of the locality by fronting the highway and respecting established building lines. The dwelling will not, in my opinion, have the appearance of a disproportionate addition in the street scene. The proposed garden to serve the new house will be of a similar size to those of nearby dwellings. The proposed dwelling will seek to replicate similar proportions to the immediately adjacent dwellings. Whilst it will be wider than the adjacent dwelling, no. 34 and will be detached, it is staggered in the same way as other properties and will not, in my opinion be incongruous in the street scene. Generally, in terms of design, I consider that the dwelling can easily assimilate into the street scene without appearing out of character.

(53) The loss of the garden to number 34 will not result in an erosion of character as the development will be sympathetic to the location pattern. The proposal is not considered to affect a significant amount of garden and therefore is not considered to result in the significant loss of choice and will allow the retention of a rear garden for no 34 which is still larger than others in the terrace. In fact, the large side garden at the site is unusual but given its topography does not provide a particularly useable garden area. The proposal will reflect the historic plot size and spacing between the buildings. The addition of one house is not, in my opinion, considered to be an over-development of the site.

(54) I do not consider that the changes in the siting will have a significant impact to the character and visual amenity of the locality. Whilst the revision will mean that the dwelling will sit slightly closer to the highway, there will still be a separation from the side boundary to prevent any overbearing impact and retain a landscaped setting to the street. Setting the proposed dwelling further back will in my opinion be an improvement to the street scene as it will provide a more noticeable staggered appearance to the building line reflecting the remainder of the development.

Impact on neighbouring amenity

(55) The current proposal sites the dwelling further to the east, such that it would be 2m closer to the south-eastern boundary and projects 2m further to the rear.

(56) The boundary between No. 34 and the new dwelling is also re-configured and a metre wide side access way is provided to both dwellings. The distance between these dwellings is now 2m. Although the proposed house will extend 3m beyond the rear elevation of the existing house, no 34, and is sited to the south of this dwelling, I am satisfied that the 2m separating distance ensures that there will not be an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of future occupants of the existing house.

(57) The proposed dwelling will sit closer to the adjacent neighbouring bungalow which sits south-east of the site. Whilst the proposed dwelling will of course be visible from this neighbouring bungalow, I do not consider that it will negatively affect the use and enjoyment of the bungalow. The bungalow will continue to have views and outlook beyond the proposed dwelling and I am satisfied that given the distance and orientation there will not be any unacceptable loss of light or overshadowing.

(58) The re-siting will still not result in the proposed dwelling directly facing the habitable rooms of the neighbouring property south of the site. Whilst the two properties would be closer I am satisfied there will be no loss of privacy as windows will not be directly facing. Under the previous application a condition was suggested requiring the first floor window to be designed so as to direct views away from this neighbour. This was considered necessary because the proposed dwelling would sit on higher ground level. I would recommend that this condition is imposed again should Members be minded to grant planning permission.

(59) I do not consider that there will be any detrimental impact on the dwellings backing onto the site as these neighbouring properties have generous rear gardens and there is still an adequate separation distance of over 30m.

(60) At the time of the previous application Policies DP1, DP2 and DP4 from the emerging Dartford Development Policies Plan were undergoing further modifications following the examination of the Plan. The modified Policies have undergone consultation and are considered to be holding very substantial weight in planning applications, as per paragraph 216 of the NPPF. The Policies have been taken into account in the assessment of the development currently under consideration. These Policies do not alter the recommendation or acceptability of the proposed development.

Amenity of future residents

(61) The dwelling will provide family sized accommodation. The bedroom sizes are generous and all exceed recommended sizes. For the size of accommodation offered, the overall space will only be 3sqm less than that recommended by the National Space Standards. This is only a very nominal shortfall and on its own I do not consider is harmful.

(62) Overall, I am satisfied that the habitable rooms will benefit from a good source of outlook and light. I consider the accommodation to be of an acceptable standard. The dwelling will be provided with a similar sized garden as those in the adjacent terraced houses. I am of the opinion that the proposed dwelling will provide good residential amenity for future occupiers, conforming to the requirements of Policy DP7.

Parking

(63) The proposal will provide two parking spaces for the new dwelling; a garage and a space in front of it. The garage is part of an existing detached block. As both spaces will serve the same dwelling, the tandem parking is considered acceptable. It is asserted by the applicant that the garage has not been associated with any of the residential dwellings on the site since they were built. The applicant has confirmed that the garage is in the applicant's ownership.

(64) I understand that not all the existing dwellings have allocated garages and that the garages were an optional 'extra' when the dwellings were originally built. Taking into account these circumstances, even though the proposed dwelling will be served by an existing garage, I do not consider that this will displace any other residents and the parking available for no 34 remains unchanged. The parking provision for the dwelling is therefore in compliance with the Council's parking standards.

(65) For this reason, I do not consider that the proposed dwelling will significantly contribute to parking pressures or undermine highway safety and satisfies Policy DP7.

Other Issues

(66) With regard to the concern raised by the resident about the area of land adjacent to the steps the applicant has confirmed that this does not fall within his ownership.

FINANCIAL BENEFITS

(67) Under section 75ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act officer reports to the Development Control Board are required to include a list of 'financial benefits' which are likely to be obtained by the authority as a result of the development. A 'financial benefit' must be recorded regardless of whether it is material to the Council's decision. Government advice is that the decision maker should consider whether it is a material consideration in the consideration of a planning application.

(68) In this particular case the following are the 'financial benefits' which I am aware of:

- Community Infrastructure Levy: CIL is charged on the net increase in floorspace of the proposed development and in this case a chargeable area of 99 square metres results in an estimated CIL liability of £19,800, which subject to indexation will be paid on implementation. As Members are aware the CIL money achieved from developments goes into a pot and must be used to fund infrastructure to support development in the area, this includes new schools and strategic junction improvements where the money will be paid to the authorities responsible for providing these services. I consider that this is a material consideration with regard to this proposal, as if the development were to commence, CIL monies received will assist in the delivery of infrastructure projects that supports local development.

- New Homes Bonus: is a grant paid by central government to local councils to reflect and incentivise housing growth in their areas. It is based on the amount of extra Council Tax revenue raised for new homes. Allocations are set by Government each year and so the amount of New Homes Bonus is not fixed for this proposal. I consider this is not a material consideration with regard to the determination of the planning application.





CONCLUSION

(71) I am therefore of the opinion that the revised siting of the proposed dwelling is not considered to have any significant detrimental impact. The application is considered to be in accordance with Local Plan policy and is thereby recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval subject to the following conditions:

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

01 In pursuance of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

02 The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documents: EX105, PP102F, PP103D, PP104D, PP105D, PP106C, PP109E, PP110A, Proposed Block Plan

02 For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory form of development.

03 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a watching brief to be undertaken by an archaeologist approved by the Local Planning Authority so that the excavation is observed and items of interest and finds are recorded. The watching brief shall be in accordance with a written programme and specification which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

03 To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded.

04 Before commencement of the development hereby approved (including demolition) a contaminated land assessment, including a site investigation and remediation methodology (if necessary) shall be submitted to, for approval by, the Local Planning Authority. If during any works contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified, the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The details shall be implemented as approved.

04 To ensure that the risks from land contamination to both future users of the land and adjoining land are minimised.

05 Before any development, including demolition or enabling works, commences details of the proposed ground levels and finished heights of the rear and side garden, including differences in height as measured from within and outside of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall only be built in accordance with these details.

05 In order to secure a satisfactory form of development in the interests of the street scene and neighbouring amenity having regard to the sloping nature of the site.

06 Before development commences, details of the existing and proposed boundary fence and treatment, including the finish and appearance of any retaining wall, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The proposed fence and boundary treatment, including any retaining wall, shall only be erected and finished in accordance with the approved details and maintained thereafter.

06 Details are required to assess the proposed visual impact.

07 Details of the proposed surface water and foul drainage and means of disposal shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is commenced.

07 To ensure that the proposed development is satisfactorily drained.

08 Before development commences, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing mitigation design features to the windows on the front elevation to restrict the angle of view to the south west. The dwelling shall only be completed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

08 In the interests of nearby amenity.

09 Prior to the erection of the dwelling hereby approved, details and samples of all materials to be used externally shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

09 To ensure that the development does not harm the character and appearance and visual amenity of the locality in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan and Policy DP2 of Dartford Development Policies Plan.

10 Prior to erection of the dwelling hereby approved, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented before the development is occupied, or of any phase of the development as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Trees and shrubs which die during this period shall be replaced.

10 In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality.

11 During enabling, demolition and construction phase, the hours of working, including deliveries and collections to and from the site, shall be restricted to: Monday to Friday 08:00 - 18:00, Saturday 08:00 - 13:00, No work on Sundays or Public Holidays.

11 In the interests of protecting the amenity of nearby residential properties.

12 Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, a contaminated land closure report shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The closure report shall include details of the proposed remediation works and the quality assurance certificates to show that the works have been carried out in full in accordance with the approved methodology. This shall include photographic evidence. Details of any post remediation sampling and analysis to show the site has reached the required clean-up criteria shall be included in the closure report together with the necessary documentation detailing what waste materials have been removed from the site.

12 In the interests of safety and amenity in accordance with Policies DL1 and DL4 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan and/or the protection of Controlled Waters.

13 Notwithstanding the approved plans, details of the proposed refuse / store shall be supplied to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is occupied. The approved refuse details shall be implemented and made available prior to occupation and maintained thereafter.

13 To ensure that the development does not harm the visual amenity of the locality in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan and Policy DP2 of Dartford Development Policies Plan.

14 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any other amending, revoking and re-enacting that Order), no windows or similar openings shall be constructed in the side elevations of the dwelling hereby approved without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

14 To enable the Local Planning Authority to regulate and control any such further development in the interests of amenity and privacy of the adjoining property in accordance with Policies H14 and B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

15 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any other amending, revoking and re-enacting that Order), no alterations or enlargements shall be made to the windows on the dwelling hereby approved, in terms of size, shape and siting without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

15 To enable the Local Planning Authority to regulate and control any such further development in the interests of amenity and privacy of the adjoining property in accordance with Policies H14 and B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

16 The first floor window on the front elevation, serving the 'bathroom' as shown on the approved plans, shall be glazed and maintained at all times in obscure glass and be non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed. Notwithstanding any internal configurations, no alterations shall be made to this window without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

16 To safeguard the privacy of adjoining residents in accordance with Policies B1of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

17 No enlargement to the dwelling hereby approved including it's roof, shall take place, whether or not permitted by virtue of Part 1 (Class A and B) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), or in any other provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order, without the prior permission of the Local Planning Authority.

17 In the interests of the character of the locality and neighbouring amenity.

18 No development comprising of a building or enclosure, swimming or other pool required for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house, or the maintenance, improvement or other alteration of such a building or enclosure, or a container used for domestic heating purposes for the storage of oil or liquid petroleum gas, shall take place whether or not permitted by virtue of Part 1 (Class E) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), or in any other provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order.

18 In the interests of the neighbouring amenity.

19 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), the space and garage shown reserved for the parking of cars shall be used for or available for such use at all times. No development shall be carried out on the area of land or to preclude vehicular access thereto.

19 Development without provision of adequate facilities for the parking and garaging of motor vehicles is likely to inconvenience other road users and be detrimental to amenity.

INFORMATIVES

01 The applicant is advised to refer the comments from the Environment Agency and Thames Water.

02 The applicant should seek approval from Building Control in relation to the installation of a gas impermeable membrane.

03 There shall be no burning of waste materials on site during the demolition and construction period.

04 If the development is to include a security light or a lighting scheme, advice should be taken from The Institute of Lighting Engineers leaflet on Domestic Security, Lighting, Friend or Foe. Following these recommendations should avoid complaints at a later date of excessive lighting for which formal action can be taken.

05 New street name(s) and/or property numbers will be required for this development. Please apply as soon as possible as this process involves lengthy consultations. Please contact the Property Information Officer on: 01322 343434.

06 Thames Water will aim to provide customers with a minimum pressure of 10m head (approx 1 bar) and a flow rate of 9 litres/minute at the point where it leaves Thames Water pipes. The developer should take account of this minimum pressure in the design of the proposed development.

07 If implemented, the development which is the subject of this notice is likely to be liable for a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payment. Persons with an interest in the land are advised to consult the CIL guide on Dartford Council's Website (http://tnyurl.com/DartfordCIL) for information on the charge and any exemptions or relief, and to submit CIL forms 5: Notice of Chargeable Development and 6: Commencement Notice (available from www.planningportal.gov.uk/cil) to the Council before commencement to avoid additional interest or surcharges. If liable, a CIL Liability Notice will be sent detailing the charges, which will be registered as a local land charge against the relevant land.

08 A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. Please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterborune, Hampshire, SO21 2SW (Tel: 0330 303 0119) or www.southernwater.co.uk

09 The applicant is advised to contact Environmental Health on 01322 343434 for technical advice with regards to the submission of a contaminated land assessment and a contaminated land closure report.

http://www.southernwater.co.uk/

Homemead

MOUNTS ROAD

PORT AVENUESTARBOARD AVENUE

VALLEY VIE

W

9

2

4

1

53

8

6

54

35

47

31

34

7

12

3822

30

44

40

46

17

21

85

32

2 6 7

73

6563

4361

41

53

144

1129

15

64

33

14

75

Playground

LB

44.5m

43.3m

El Sub Sta

Wharnecliffe House

Mountcroft

Elmshurst

Cobham Close

TCB

Mounts Court

Haslington

Spinnaker Court

The Cottage

Lorraine Court

Rosewood

Bridge

VALLEY VIE

W

6111

8

221

6

1

1

12


[


Address : 34 Valley View Greenhithe

Date: 31 May 2017 Scale: Not to Scale


15 June 2017

Reference: 17/00373/FUL Officer: Matthew Apperley

Location: Eebs StablesTrollingdown HillGreen Street Green RoadDartfordKent

Proposal: Provision of 1 No. additional mobile home and hard standing

Applicant: Mr W Chambers

Agent: Ruston Planning Limited/Dr Simon Ruston

Parish / Ward: Darenth Parish Council / Brent

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval of permission for a temporary period.

SITE DESCRIPTION

(1) The application relates to a parcel of land located to the south of an unmade access road which serves properties on Trollingdown Hill. The site has a maximum width of 39m (east-west) and a maximum depth of 35m (north-south). (2) There is an 'L' shaped stable block located towards the south-western section of the site. The stables are set at a slightly lower level than the track. They have been finished with cement fibre weatherboard to their elevations and a pitched slate roof. Outside the stables is an area of paving with the remainder of the site being finished in crushed stone / shingle. The elevation running east-west is approximately 15m in length and the elevation running north-south is approximately 13.6m in length.

(3) The mobile home approved at Appeal in August 2015, which measures 13.6m in width and 5.8m in depth, is located in the north-western section of the site. Appeal reference APP/T2215/W/15/3006764 also allowed part of the existing stable block to be converted into a bathroom and a utility room. The Inspector only gave the said mobile home a temporary permission of three years which expires on the 4th August 2018.

(4) The additional mobile home, which is the subject of this application, is already on site, but not in the proposed location. It is currently positioned, partially within the south-eastern section of the application site boundary and partially in the adjacent paddock which lies outside the application site. The applicant has stated that were the application approved then the mobile home would be moved westwards into the position shown on the submitted plans. In-between the stable block and the currently unauthorised mobile home there is an area of gravel used to park a couple of tourer caravans which are not at present lived in.

(5) Beyond the site to the south is a field, in the ownership of the applicant, which falls steeply away in the direction of Green Street Green Road. To the north of the site on the opposite side of the access track is a substantial hedge beyond which is Fleetdown Primary School. A bungalow is to the east, approximately 50m away across the paddock, and there are some agricultural and livery buildings to the west which are associated with Benlin Farm Cottage.

THE PROPOSAL

(6) The application seeks planning permission for the siting of an additional mobile home and hard standing within the application site. The proposal would also increase the amount of gravel parking area on the site, and relocate some of the post and rail timber fences on the site, thus extending the residential part of the site into the paddock. New Laurel hedging is also proposed to help separate the proposal from the paddock to the east of the application site. (7) The mobile home which is the subject of this application would be sited in the south-eastern corner of the site, approximately 1.6m - 1.8m away from the southern boundary of the site. The mobile home measures 11m in width and 3.6m in depth, and is finished in materials which match the adjacent stable block.

(8) The applicant who lives in the authorised mobile home on the site has stated that the additional mobile home is required to provide the necessary space for his daughter who has recently had a baby.

RELEVANT HISTORY

(9) A block of 4 stables, feed / hay / straw store and tack room was approved on the site on 22nd November 2012 (application reference 12/01197/FUL). A revised retrospective application in relation to re-siting the block of 4 stables, feed / hay / straw store and tack room previously approved was granted planning permission on 7th February 2014 (application reference 13/01622/FUL).

(10) An application for the siting of a mobile home under gypsy status and a detached utility block (application reference 13/01302/FUL) was refused on 22nd November 2013 for the following reasons:

- The proposed development is inappropriate development within the Green Belt and in the absence of any very special circumstances the proposal is contrary to adopted Core Strategy Policies CS13 and CS20, Adopted Dartford Local Plan Policies C1 and C2, the National Planning Policy Framework and 'Planning Policy for Traveller Sites'.

- The proposed development is an intrusive and incongruous feature within the rural landscape and as such is contrary to Policies C1 and C2 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

- The proposed development fails to meet the criteria for the creation of a permanent Gypsy and Traveller site and as such is contrary to Policy CS20 of the adopted Core Strategy.

(11) A subsequent application for the siting of a mobile home and partial conversion of existing stables as a utility room (application reference 14/00489/FUL) was refused on the grounds that the proposal would represent inappropriate development within the Green Belt to the detriment of the openness of the Green Belt and the character and appearance of the rural landscape. However, this scheme was granted at Appeal by the Planning Inspectorate on 4th August 2015. The permission is personal to the applicant and was only for three years from the date of the Inspectors decision. Consequently, the temporary permission for the approved mobile home expires on the 4th August 2018.

(12) On 27th January 2016 details relating to the means of foul and surface water drainage of the site; facilities for the storage and collection of refuse and waste; and details of any external lighting pursuant to condition 4 of planning permission DA/14/00489/FUL (granted on appeal) for siting of a mobile home and partial conversion of existing stables as a utility room were approved under application reference 15/01583/CDNA.


(13) Environmental Health: Request the imposition of a condition relating to land contamination upon any approval.

(14) KCC Highways: Consider that the proposals are unlikely to have any significant impact on the public highway and do not therefore object to the proposal.

(15) Kent Police: No comments.

(16) Housing Officer: No objection in principle as long as on the receipt of any planning consent, a Caravan Site Licence application is made. Any such application would have to meet the relevant site licensing requirements as per emerging Development Policies Plan Policy DP10:3a. The existing mobile home on site should already hold a Caravan Licence but it does not and no application has been received by the Licencing department from the applicant.


(17) None received

RELEVANT POLICIES



(20) The Development Policies Plan(DPP) has undergone extensive consultation, following the Development Policies Plan Proposed Modifications public consultation, the Inspector completed a set of further modifications which solely concern retail policy. Limited comments have been received on this, and no other issues at all were under consideration at this most recent stage. The DPP adoption is expected summer 2017. Therefore all policies as modified, other than DP14, should be considered as holding very substantial weight in planning applications (as per NPPF paragraph 216).

(21) As such, the following policies are relevant.

Adopted Dartford Core Strategy 2011

(22) Policy CS13 - Green Belt - inappropriate development should be resisted within the Green Belt in order to protect the openness of the Green Belt which is in accordance with national policy.

(23) Policy CS15: Managing Transport Demand seeks to minimise car use and make the most effective use of the transport network. Also ensures that appropriate parking standards are applied.

(24) Policy CS20 - Gypsies and Travellers - sets out the factors which will be taken into account in identifying sites for Gypsies and Travellers. It is stated that the Council will take into account:

- Impact of proposed provision on adjacent residential communities.

- Accessibility of a proposed location to education, health, community facilities and public transport.

- Protection of openness of the Green Belt.

- The availability and delivery of sites.

- Other planning constraints, including flood risk. (25) In addition, point 2 of policy CS20 states that potential for additional pitches will be explored on existing sites, subject to potential sites meeting the criteria above and addressing the needs of the gypsy community.


(26) Policy S4 - Green Belt strategy - general presumption against development in the Green Belt, and a focus on the continued protection of the countryside, in particular its amenity value and recreation potential.

(27) Policy T23 - Parking - development proposals should include adequate off-street parking.

(28) Policy B1 - New Development - a high standard of design will be required in all development proposals, embracing the principles of Kent Design with particular regard to form, massing and scale and associated inter-relationships. Materials should be of good quality, appearance and durability.

(29) Policy C1 - Development in the Countryside - will be assessed against its impact on the rural landscape and nature conservation.


(30) Policy DP2 - Good Design in Dartford - development will only be permitted where they respond to, reinforce and enhance positive aspects of the locality. Opportunities to create high quality places should be taken. Good design should reinforce a sense of place, including walking/cycling permeability, active frontages, social interaction, inclusive neighbourhoods and positive public realm, inclusive of public art. LPAs will consider proposals in terms of height, mass, form, scale, orientation, siting, setback, access, overshadowing, articulation, detailing, roof form and landscaping. Materials should be locally sourced or recycled within the site. Developments should be designed with principles of Safer Places. Layout and design must be water efficient and alleviate on-site floodrisk.

(31) Policy DP3 - Transport Access and Design - development will only be permitted where it is appropriately located and makes suitable provision to minimise and manage the arising transport impacts.

(32) Policy DP5 - Environmental and Amenity Protection - development must not, on its own or cumulatively, give rise to unacceptable material impacts on neighbouring uses, the Borough environment of public health.

(33) Policy DP10 - Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Accommodation - the Local Planning Authority will, through its planning and other roles, work actively to identify a supply of gypsy and traveller pitches and travelling showpeople plots sufficient to meet future identified needs in the Borough.

(34) In addition point 3 of policy DP10 states that planning applications for gypsy and traveller pitches and plots for travelling showpeople will be assessed against relevant local and national policy requirements. Proposals located in the Green Belt will be determined in accordance with the balancing exercise set out in national policy and with regard to relevant material considerations.

(35) Policy DP22 - Green Belt in the Borough - inappropriate development should be resisted within the Green Belt in order to protect the openness and permanence of the Green Belt which is in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

(36) Updated Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) (2013).


(37) Paragraphs 89 and 90 set out development that is not inappropriate in the Green Belt. The proposal does not fall within any of the stated exceptions. Where development is inappropriate, paragraph 87 confirms that "As with previous Green Belt policy, inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances." (38) Paragraph 88 advises that substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt. It is stated that 'very special circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPTS) August 2015 (39) This national planning policy for travellers and Policy E (paragraph 14) states that traveller sites, whether temporary or permanent, in the Green Belt are inappropriate development. It is also stated that inappropriate development is harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved, except in very special circumstances. The policy clarifies that subject to the best interests of children, personal circumstances and unmet need are unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt or any other harm so as to establish very special circumstances.

(40) Policy H (paragraphs 22 to 27) set out issues alongside other relevant matters that should be considered with regard to determining planning applications for traveller sites. Consideration must be given to local provision and need for sites, availability of alternative accommodation for the applicants, and other personal circumstances of the applicant. Paragraph 26 sets out that weight should be applied to various matters including landscaping proposals.

COMMENTS

Key Issues

(41) The key issues in the consideration of this application include the appropriateness of the development within the Green Belt; the impact on the openness and character and appearance of the Green Belt; the case for very special circumstances; the accessibility of the site; and any other issues, including the impact on adjoining properties and parking and highway safety issues.

The appropriateness of the development within the Green Belt

(42) The proposed development constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt, as it does not fall within any of the stated exceptions within the NPPF. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful and the NPPF states that such developments should not be approved except in very special circumstances with substantial weight being given to any harm to the Green Belt. Local policy CS13 seeks to resist inappropriate development in the Green Belt. In addition PPTS and emerging local policy DP22 also emphasise the importance of the protection of the Green Belt from inappropriate forms of development and those statements and policies are material considerations in the determination of this application.

(43) The Inspector in the previous Appeal concluded that the siting of a mobile home in this location within the Green Belt was inappropriate development and contrary to the NPPF, the PPTS and Dartford local policy.

(44) The NPPF highlights that inappropriate development should not be allowed within the Green Belt unless it can be demonstrated that there are very special circumstances for allowing an inappropriate development which outweigh the harm caused to the openness and character and appearance of the Green Belt.

The impact on the openness and character and appearance of the Green Belt

(45) The application site is located within the Green Belt and although it abuts the Fleet Estate to the north of the site, I consider that the high hedge on the northern side of the access road and the significant views to the south over the rolling countryside, undoubtedly provide this site with a sense of being part of the rural landscape and certainly a step change from the widespread urban development to the north.

(46) Local Green Belt policies confirm that inappropriate development will be resisted in accordance with government guidance. One of the 12 core planning principles contained within the NPPF states that planning should take account of the different roles and character of different areas, protecting Green Belt and recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that the government "attaches great importance to Green Belts" with the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy being to "prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence."

(47) Openness in the context of the Green Belt is generally held to mean the absence of development and is a characteristic of land which has not been built upon or is free from above-ground development. The siting of an additional authorised mobile home on the land will have a greater impact on openness than if the site had a single mobile home on it.

(48) The southern part of the site where the mobile home is proposed to be sited commands a prominent and exposed location due to it forming part of the rolling open topography of the locality. This is especially apparent when viewed from the south, east and west of the site. The relevant part of the site remains open and free of authorised above-ground development, and consequently, I consider any permanent development sited here would harm the openness of the Green Belt and additionally harm the character of the rural landscape.

(49) Aside from countryside considerations, saved policy C1 also states that development proposals will be considered against the quality of agricultural land involved and the extent to which proposals would sterilise the future use of the land for agricultural purposes. In the emerging development policies plan document, policy DP22 (Green Belt in the Borough) point 8 states that development should not result in the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land. The proposal would not result in the loss of quality agricultural land, and a temporary permission would see the site returned to more suitable rural uses.

The case for very special circumstances

(50) In support of the application the applicant has put forward several arguments in support of his case that very special circumstances exist. These are considered capable of summary as follows:

- An alleged unmet need for traveller sites and a lack of 5-year supply.

- The alleged absence of alternative sites.

- A 'strong likelihood' of any Gypsy / Traveller site in Dartford being in the Green Belt.

- The personal circumstances of the applicant and his family.

Need for traveller sites and the 5-year supply

(51) With regard to the issue of alleged unmet need for traveller sites and a lack of 5-year supply, policy CS20 (d) and policy DP10 require the Council to take into account the availability and delivery of sites for Gypsies and Travellers.

(52) In 2013 the University of Salford produced an updated Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) on behalf of Dartford Council. The primary purpose of the assessment was to provide up-to-date information and data regarding the needs and requirements of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Show people communities.

(53) The study has been a key contributor to inform and support the preparation of Dartford's Gypsy, Traveller & Travelling Show people Implementation Strategy Update and Dartford's emerging Development Policies Plan. The study sought to assess the accommodation needs of all GTTS who met the planning definition contained in the previous version of PPTS (2012). (54) An understanding of GTTS lifestyles and current accommodation circumstances, together with future accommodation need and aspirations was obtained through a survey of 58 traveller households in Dartford (46% of the estimated population) undertaken in May 2013. In addition the study drew upon relevant information from key stakeholders where this could be obtained, Dartford Borough Council, the bi-annual caravan count and the 2011 Census data.

(55) The survey indicated that in general, the GTTS community appeared settled with little intention to move and with long-standing local connections. The population was largely Romany gypsies, with significantly smaller proportions of Irish travellers and travelling showpeople.

(56) The GTTA provided what was considered to be a reasonable and robust assessment of need derived from the findings of the surveys undertaken with traveller households in Dartford. The GTAA highlights that between 2013 and 2028 there will be a need for 34 additional pitches within Dartford Borough, with 13 of these being provided by 2018 and an additional 8 pitches (pro-rata) needed up to 2023. Therefore taking backlog and future need into account Dartford's five year supply requirement is 21 pitches.

(57) The PPTS requires the Council to identify a 5-year supply of sites (i.e. the sites should be available now, offer a suitable location and have a realistic prospect that pitches/plots will be delivered within 5 years).

(58) Additional permanent permission was granted for gypsy caravans (representing two pitches) at Shirehall Farm in July 2015 and at Nurstead Stables January 2016. These developments directly address backlog of need identified in the Dartford GTAA. The traveller site in Knoxfield had permission for a caravan site for 16 caravans / mobile homes (application reference 13/00536/COU), which would have addressed the needs up to present. However, whilst the owner has indicated his ongoing interest in providing caravan accommodation, that particular permission has since expired due to technical difficulties in approving the condition details. The Council is working to see if the technical issues can be resolved at the Knoxfield site and the 16 previously approved caravan pitches provided.

(59) I consider it important to note that the PPTS highlights in paragraph 16 that unmet need is unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt so as to establish very special circumstances. Therefore, whilst there is at present an ongoing need for GTTS pitches within Dartford, I do not believe that this outweighs the significant harm the proposal would have on the openness and character and appearance of the Belt.

Alternative gypsy / traveller sites

(60) The applicant has advised that case law (Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v First Secretary of State and another) exists where the Courts afforded considerable weight in favour of Gypsy and Traveller development where there is a lack of any alternate, available, affordable, acceptable and suitable land to locate the site occupants.

(61) At the Appeal for the existing authorised on site mobile home, the Inspector also placed considerable weight on the fact that the lack of any alternate sites for the family to move onto at the time of the Appeal, was potentially harmful as it could lead to them living a roadside existence. The applicant has relied on the evidence submitted at the said Appeal in relation to the issue of alternate site provision in this current case. He has not provided up to date assessments or evidence with regards to current availability of alternate sites. I consider that the applicant is aware of the need for him to be looking for alternate suitable sites for when the existing mobile home is removed. I believe that a temporary permission until the 4th August 2018 would allow sufficient time for the applicant and his family to find an alternate more suitable site.

The personal circumstances of the applicant and his family

(62) The PPTS highlights that personal circumstances should be considered in the determination of applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites. The applicant states that the authorised mobile home on site is too small to home himself, his four (grown up) children and a young baby. Consequently, the mobile home which is the subject of this application, is required to provide additional space for his daughter and granddaughter. The applicant's daughter temporarily stayed in the touring caravan on site, but that proved incompatible with looking after a young baby as they do not have all the required amenities. The applicant states that the mobile home is necessary in order to alleviate overcrowding and to provide the mother and baby with all necessary amenities.

(63) Part of the applicant's submission is that he and his family have an aversion to living in 'bricks and mortar' accommodation. In the case of Burton J Clark v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Tunbridge Wells BC, the judgement highlighted that applicants need to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the determining body that they genuinely have, and abide by, a proscription of, and/or an aversion to, conventional housing: to bricks and mortar. Having regard to the personal submitted information regarding the applicant and his family living in bricks and mortar I do not consider that it has been proven that an aversion exists to living in bricks and mortar. This is primarily based on the level and uncorroborated nature of the submitted information.

(64) However, I do consider that in accordance with considerations to be applied as set out in the PPTS, the wellbeing of the baby to be extremely important in this instance. In the apparent current absence of any real alternative Gypsy or Traveller sites within the Borough at present, refusal of the application may lead to the applicant's daughter and 1 month old granddaughter either continuing to live in cramped conditions with the extended family; living in a touring caravan or having to find a alternative pitch a long distance away from their family. I consider that these potential outcomes, indicate that weight should be applied to the best interests of the applicants grandchild in the balancing exercise to be applied regarding harm to the Green Belt in this instance.

(65) As highlighted earlier in the report the Council has identified actions within its Implementation Plan and is positively working with landowners where appropriate to provide additional Gypsy and Traveller plots within the borough. Therefore, I believe that there are longer term possibilities regarding Knoxfield or other potential sites, which could provide acceptable accommodation for the applicant and his family in the future.

Determining whether very special circumstances exist

(66) I attach substantial weight to the harm to the Green Belt arising from this proposal and significant weight to other harms identified. However this must be balanced against other considerations, which have potential to outweigh harm to the Green Belt.

(67) At the time of the previous Appeal the Inspector accepted that the applicant had sufficiently demonstrated that there were no alternate sites at that time. I note no further information on the applicant's search for alternate sites have been provided within this application. Consequently, I apply some weight to the applicant's submission that there are no alternate sites available at this moment in time.

(68) Considerable weight should be applied to a lack of sufficient deliverable Traveller sites to the meet the 5 year supply, notwithstanding the implementation actions being progressed by the Council in order to address the issue of a lack of identified sites to provide a five year supply.

(69) I attach significant weight to the current circumstances of the applicant's new born granddaughter and the potential for her and her mother to have to resort to inappropriate accommodation at this time and I am mindful of the human rights of the applicant to a family life.

(70) Taking into account that the applicant and his family reside in a caravan at the application site that is authorised by temporary planning consent, and that the applicant will therefore need to seek future alternative accommodation on land that is not within the Green Belt. I do not consider at this point that the circumstances set out above outweigh the substantial harm of this proposal to the openness of the Green Belt that would result if a permanent consent was to be approved. However, at this moment in time, in order to protect the human rights of the applicant and his family (including the young baby) I consider a temporary permission to the 4th August 2018 in line with the expiry of the current temporary consent, may be appropriate in order to allow the applicant and his family time to find an acceptable alternate location.

(71) This would allow the applicant with his extended family to seek suitable land for permanent accommodation. I also consider a temporary consent would ensure suitable accommodation for the applicant's granddaughter for an initial period and would result in her well-being. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of PTTS para 16 which states that subject to the best interests of the child, personal circumstances and unmet need are unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt. In recommending that temporary approval be given I am mindful of the temporary harm to openness of the Green Belt and visual impact that would occur. However after the 4th August 2018 both mobile homes would be required to be moved which would return the site back to its undeveloped appearance sympathetic to the Green Belt.

(72) I consider that very special circumstances exist to warrant grant of temporary consent. However, this finding is subject to other applicable material considerations set out below.

The accessibility of the site

(73) Policies CS20 and DP10 and paragraph 13 of the PPTS require consideration of the accessibility of a proposed location in terms of public transport provision, and educational, health and community facilities.

(74) The access road which leads to the site from Green Street Green Road does not appear to have any connections to the Fleetdown Primary School to the north and the local amenities in the surrounding Fleet Estate. Also there are no bus stops within the recommended 400m walking distance of the site. Therefore, I do not believe that the site can be described as being either accessible or sustainable. However, the site is within a short car journey to reach the nearest medical practice (Pilgrims Way Surgery) or the Darent Valley

Hospital, which is considered of particular importance with such a young baby on the site. Consequently, I believe a temporary permission would be appropriate in this instance, as it would allow the applicant and his family to find a more sustainable location.

Amenity on neighbouring residents

(75) Policy CS20 requires account to be taken of the impact of the proposed pitch provision on adjacent residential communities. As noted earlier within this report, to the north of the site is a school and its grounds, to the east is a paddock, to the south of the site is a field and to the west are some agricultural buildings. (76) The nearest residential properties to the site are those accessed from the lane serving the site. These houses are The Bungalow (approximately 48m to the east of the site) and Corfield Cottage and Benlin Farm Cottage (approximately 75m to the west of the site). There is no reason to believe that an additional mobile home at the application site would result in any unacceptable impacts on the nearest adjacent residents or those further away.

Parking

(77) I believe that the application site is large enough to provide both mobile homes on site with adequate car parking and would not lead to indiscriminate on street car parking. The addition of a second mobile home for the applicant's daughter and granddaughter would not lead to increased congestion or highway safety issues on either the access road or the surrounding highway network.

Land Contamination

(78) The site is located within 200m of a known landfill site and this fact combined with the fact that the site contains a potentially polluting stable use requires that a condition requiring an assessment of the contamination potential of the site should be imposed should Members be minded to grant planning permission in the interests of the health of the occupants.





CONCLUSIONS

(81) The NPPF requires the Council to consider whether there are any considerations which may be construed as being very special circumstances and which would outweigh the harm caused by the proposal in terms of the impact on the openness of the Green Belt and on the character and appearance of the rural landscape.

(82) In this particular instance I consider that the personal circumstances of the applicant and his family, in particular the well-being of a baby, result in very special circumstances to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt being established at the precise moment in time. The personal circumstances of the mother and baby will undoubtedly change and therefore personal circumstances of the applicant may not outweigh the detrimental impact caused by the proposal in the Green Belt in the future. In addition alternate suitable sites may come forward. Consequently, I consider that a temporary permission is appropriate in this case and when the permission expires the site should be returned to its former condition.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approval of permission for a temporary period.

01 The use hereby permitted shall be carried on only by Mr William Chambers and jointly with his children and granddaughter (Scarlet) and shall be for a limited period expiring on the 4th August 2018, or the period during which the premises are occupied by them, whichever is the shorter.When the premises cease to be occupied by Mr William Chambers and his resident children and granddaughter or by the 4th August 2018, whichever shall first occur, the use hereby permitted shall cease, the mobile home/static caravan and all materials and equipment and hardstandings brought on to the premises in connection with the use shall be removed and the land restored to its former condition in accordance with a scheme of work submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

01 Permission would not otherwise have been forthcoming and is only granted by reason of the very special circumstances associated with the applicant and his dependent family and bearing in mind the impact of the proposal on the character and openness of the Green Belt and in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan (1995), Policy CS13 of the Dartford Core Strategy (2011) and Policy DP22 of the emerging Dartford Development Policies Plan (2015). In such exceptional circumstances, the permission should not run with the land, be personal to the applicant and should be for a limited period only.

02 The use hereby permitted shall cease and all caravans, structures, equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed within 28 days of the date of failure to meet any one of the requirements set out in (i) to (iv) below:

(i) Within 3 months of the date of this decision details of the means of foul and surface water drainage of the site; parking and amenity areas; tree, hedge and shrub planting including details of species, plant sizes and proposed numbers and densities; facilities for the storage and collection of refuse and waste; details of the type and size of any external lighting to be provided (hereafter referred to as the site development scheme) shall have been submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority and the said scheme shall include a timetable for its implementation.

(ii) Within 11 months of the date of this decision, full approval by the local planning authority of the site development scheme set out in (i) above shall have been obtained by the applicant or if the local planning authority refuse to approve the scheme, or fail to give a decision within the prescribed period, an appeal shall have been made to and accepted as validly made by the Secretary of State.

(iii) If an appeal is made in pursuance of the above, that appeal shall have been finally determined and the submitted details pursuant to the requirements in part (i) of this condition shall have been approved by the Secretary of State.

(iv) The approved scheme shall have been carried out and completed in accordance with the approved timetable.

02 In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

03 No more than two mobile homes / caravans as defined in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968 shall be stationed on the site at any time.

03 In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

04 At the same time as the details required by condition 02 above are submitted to the local planning authority details shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority of a schedule of maintenance for the period of the planning permission for the proposed landscape planting and the maintenance without obstruction of visibility splays at the site entrance. Such schedule to make provision for the replacement, in the same position of any tree, hedge or shrub that is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies or in the opinion of the local planning authority, becomes seriously damaged or defective, with another of the same species and size as that originally planted. The maintenance shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

04 In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan (1995).

05 No commercial activities shall take place on the land, including the storage of materials.


06 No vehicle over 3.5 tonnes shall be stationed, parked or stored on the site.


07 Within 3 months of the date of this decision a contaminated land assessment, including a site investigation and remediation methodology (if necessary) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any remediation details shall be implemented as approved.

07 In the interests of safety and amenity in accordance with Policies DL1 and DL4 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan and/or the protection of Controlled Waters.

INFORMATIVES

01 The applicant is advised to contact the Head of Housing Services, Dartford Borough Council, Civic Centre, Home Gardens, Dartford, Kent, DA1 1DR, regarding the requirements for a site license under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960.

02 The applicant is reminded that the current location of the mobile home is unauthorised.

Fleet-Downs

Clo

se

Fleetdown Tank

The Bungalow

6

Shepherd's House

127

117

120114

113

Green

123

13

131

810

45

52

51

11

El Sub Sta

Tank


[


Address : Eebs Stables Trollingdown Hill Green Street Green Road Dartford Kent

Date: 1 June 2017 Scale: Not to Scale

DARTFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL

DELEGATED LISTOF APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

Excluding Ebbsfleet UDC Applications

Date Report Compiled: 31-May-2017Period for Report: 03/05/2017 to 31/05/2017

Plan Ref 14/00202/CDNA Date Issued 15/05/2017Location Land At St Clements WayProposal Submission of details relating to ecological mitigation strategies pursuant to Condition 6 of Planning

Permission DA/12/01404/FUL for erection of 187 dwellings extending to between 2 and 3 storeys in height, including 132 houses and 55 flats, together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works and conditions 10 (LEMP) and 14 (Bio-Diversity Management) of planning permission reference 14/01344/FUL for Erection of 156 dwellings comprising47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works

Ward CastleDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 14/01702/FUL Date Issued 26/05/2017Location Crest Sales Office Stonely Crescent Greenhithe Kent DA9 9SZ Proposal Application for the temporary relocation of the sales and marketing suite at Ingress Park (previously

approved under planning permission DA/14/00645/FUL)

Ward GreenhitheDecision Approval of permission for a temp periodOfficer Mrs Sonia Bunn

Plan Ref 16/00424/CDNA Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 225 London Road Stone Kent DA9 9RRProposal Submission of contaminated land assessment and closure report pursuant to Conditions 3 and 13 of

Planning Permission DA/13/01241/FUL for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of part two/part three storey property to provide 13 flats (9 x 2 bed, 2 x1 bed, 2 x 3 bed) and associated parking.

Ward StoneDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 15/00435/CDNA Date Issued 25/05/2017Location Junction Stonely Crescent And Liverymen Walk Ingress Park Site Greenhithe Kent Proposal Submission of details relating to external materials pursuant to condition 4 of planning permission

DA/12/00233/FUL for erection of a single storey building to provide community centre

Ward GreenhitheDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Mrs Sonia Bunn

Page 1 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00466/FUL Date Issued 05/05/2017Location 18 Heathwood Walk Bexley Kent DA5 2BP Proposal Raising height of roof for provision of dormer window in rear elevation and roof light in front elevation

in connection with providing additional rooms in roof space

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00467/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 18 Gerdview Drive Wilmington Kent DA2 7BS Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension and a front porchWard WilmingtonDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00485/FUL Date Issued 18/05/2017Location 204 Summerhouse Drive Bexley Kent DA2 7PB Proposal Erection of a detached annex in rear garden ancillary to main houseWard Joydens WoodDecision Application Refused - Overbearing impact on adjacent properties, overlooking into the garden of

No.206, inadequate off street parking provisionOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00518/LBC Date Issued 16/05/2017Location Dartford Grammar School For Boys West Hill Dartford Kent DA1 2HW Proposal Application for Listed Building Consent for display of 2 No. non illuminated free standing name signsWard West HillDecision Consent for LBOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 17/00519/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 9 The Chenies Wilmington Kent DA2 7NP Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extensionWard Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00520/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 9 Reservoir Close Greenhithe Kent DA9 9BX Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension (retrospective application)Ward GreenhitheDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Page 2 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00564/LDC Date Issued 17/05/2017Location 12 Southfleet Road Swanscombe Kent DA10 0BB Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed dormer window in rear elevation and

velux roof windows in front elevation in connection with providing additional rooms in the roof space

Ward SwanscombeDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00537/FUL Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 21 Broomhill Road Dartford Kent DA1 3HT Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extensionWard HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00636/CDNA Date Issued 03/05/2017Location Plot 17 The Bridge Brunel Way Dartford KentProposal Submission of details relating to archaeological and geo-archaeological evaluation pursuant to condition

11 of planning permission DA/16/01540/FUL for erection of a three storey academy building for up to 360 students plus staff, amendments to the existing Leigh UTC car park to provide 31 additional spaces, including 1 disabled bay and new landscaping areas including both hard and soft social areas

Ward Joyce GreenDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Mr P Nicholls

Plan Ref 17/00642/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 16 Heathclose Avenue Dartford Kent DA1 2PH Proposal Provision of a pitched roof over flat roof of existing first floor side/rear extensionWard HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00553/P3Q Date Issued 22/05/2017Location Barns A & B Manor House Farm Westwood Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9LZ Proposal Application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted

Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for change of use from agricultural building to three dwelling houses (Class C3) and associated development

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Prior Approval Required and Refused – not permitted developmentOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00667/PDE Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 2 Bondfield Walk Dartford Kent DA1 5JS Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for the erection of a single storey rear extension

Ward Joyce GreenDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 3 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00580/LDC Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 19 Louvain Road Horns Cross Greenhithe Kent DA9 9DY Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed erection of detached outbuildingWard StoneDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00581/FUL Date Issued 19/05/2017Location Rutherglen Dartford Road Sutton At Hone Kent DA4 9HY Proposal Provision of a dormer window in side elevation in connection with reconfiguring rooms in the roof space

Ward Sutton At Hone & HawleyDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00582/FUL Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 38 Wellcome Avenue Dartford Kent DA1 5JW Proposal Erection of a single storey rear conservatoryWard Joyce GreenDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00544/TPO Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Land Opposite Birdswood And Rear Of Birdwood And Haldon Rowhill Road Wilmington Kent Proposal Application to carry out various works to 26 trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders No. 5 1978 and

No.3 1964

Ward Wilmington Decision Split decision - The works to trees T4, T5, T9 and T10 – T26 would detrimentally harm the treescape and character and appearance of the locality and would harm the health of the protected woodland.

Officer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 17/00538/FUL Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 41 Woodlands Park Bexley Kent DA5 2EN Proposal Erection of a part two/part single storey rear extension, part two/part single storey front extension

incorporating raising roof and conversion of existing garage into habitable room

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00640/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location Co-op Foodstore 24 - 26 Temple Hill Square Dartford Kent DA1 5HZ Proposal Repainting of shopfront to grey, with roller shutters painted green, replace glazing with composite

panels in shopfront, replace netting above shopfront windows with bird spikes and removal of existing air-conditioning units and installation of 3 No. air-conditioning units to rear elevation

Ward Joyce GreenDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Page 4 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00706/NONMAT Date Issued 05/05/2017Location West Wing Pescot House Main Road Longfield Kent DA3 7AE Proposal Application for a non material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/14/01820/FUL

in respect of altering internal layout, install air source heat pump and install 2 No. solar panels

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Approval of non-material amendmentsOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00695/AGR Date Issued 09/05/2017Location Land Junction Newbarn Road, Station Road And A2 Westbound Slip Road Southfleet Kent Proposal Application under Schedule 2 part 6 class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted

Development) (England) Order 2015 to determine whether prior approval is required for erection of an agricultural building for use as storage for bulk animal feed and agricultural implements

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Permission Required – adverse impactOfficer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00477/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 1 & 1A Priory Gardens Dartford Kent DA1 2BE Proposal Demolition of 1A Priory Gardens and erection of two storey side extension to No.1 Priory Gardens to

provide 2 No. self-contained two bedroom flats together with erection of a part two/part first floor rear extension of 1 Priory Gardens

Ward West HillDecision Application PermittedOfficer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00523/FUL Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 22 Carisbrooke Court Osbourne Road Dartford Kent DA2 6RQ Proposal Replacement of four timber windows with uPVC windowsWard NewtownDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00542/LDC Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 21 Morris Gardens Dartford Kent DA1 5DB Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed erection of a single storey side/rear

extension

Ward LittlebrookDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00570/OBB Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Port Of TilburyProposal Scoping Consultation under Planning Act 2008 (as amended) and The Infrastructure Planning

(Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 (as amended) (Regulations 8 and 9 for an order granting development consent for proposed Tilbury 2

Ward Outside Borough BoundaryDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mr P Nicholls

Page 5 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00427/TPO Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 14 Langworth Close Wilmington Kent DA2 7ET Proposal Application to fell 5 No. Sycamore trees subject to Tree Preservation Order No.9 1983 and replaced

with Silver Birch trees

Ward WilmingtonDecision Consent for TPOOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 17/00454/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Knoll House Crayburne Southfleet Kent DA13 9PB Proposal Submission of details relating to archaeological evaluation pursuant to condition 3 of planning

permission DA/16/01310/FUL for demolition of existing detached house and erection of two-storey detached house with garage and playroom/gym

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00457/CDNA Date Issued 11/05/2017Location Agricultural Bungalow At Highfield Farm Betsham Road Southfleet KentProposal Submission of details relating to external materials pursuant to condition 1 of planning permission

DA/16/00300/P3Q for application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for change of use from agricultural building to one dwelling house (Class C3) and associated development

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00458/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Agricultural Barn Highfield Farm Betsham Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9PD Proposal Submission of details relating to contaminated land assessment pursuant to condition 4 of planning

permission DA/16/01329/P3Q for application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for change of use from agricultural building to two dwelling houses (Class C3) and associated development


Plan Ref 17/00660/PDE Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 120 Charles Street Stone Kent DA9 9AJ Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward StoneDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 6 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00684/PDE Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 6 Rowhill Cottages Puddledock Lane Wilmington Kent DA2 7QF Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward Joydens WoodDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00685/OBB Date Issued 16/05/2017Location Land Adj Tilbury Power StationProposal Consultation on the application for Continued re-profiling of the site to 9 metres AOD using inert

reclamation material imported by river, in place of Pulverised Fuel Ash from the adjacent now redundant Power Station within Thurrock


Plan Ref 17/00688/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St Clements WayProposal Submission of details relating to provision of satellite/cable television in Blocks A, B, E & F pursuant

to condition 19 of planning permission DA/14/01344/FUL and condition 10 of planning permission 16/00918/CDNA for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 17/00430/FUL Date Issued 03/05/2017Location 64 Darenth Park Avenue Darenth Kent DA2 6LX Proposal Erection of a single storey side and rear extension and conversion of existing attached garage into

habitable room together with associated alterations to front elevation

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00437/FUL Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 62 Elm Road Dartford Kent DA1 2RX Proposal Erection of two storey side extension and single storey rear extensionWard PrincesDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00459/FUL Date Issued 03/05/2017Location 48 Spurrell Avenue Bexley Kent DA5 2EX Proposal Raising height of roof for provision of roof lights in side and rear elevations to create storage area in roof

space and erection of a first floor side/rear extension and single storey rear extension

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Page 7 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00460/LDC Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Elmstone Betsham Road Southfleet DA13 9PDProposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for proposed erection of a single storey side extension,

front porch and provision of a dormer window in rear elevation in connection with providing additional storage room in the roof space

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00645/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 49 Havelock Road Dartford Kent DA1 3HY Proposal Erection of a single storey side extensionWard HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00747/PDE Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 75 Wentworth Drive Dartford Kent DA1 3NQ Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward HeathDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00555/CDNA Date Issued 19/05/2017Location 13 Lowfield Street Dartford DA1 1ENProposal Submission of details relating to archaeological watching brief pursuant to condition 2 of planning

permission DA/14/00263/FUL for erection of a first floor rear extension and creation of entrance at rear ground floor level to provide 1 x 3 bed flat at first floor and 1 x 2 bed maisonette on 2nd & 3rd floors with terrace areas on 1st and 2nd floors levels and associated alterations to elevations

Ward TownDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00560/FUL Date Issued 25/05/2017Location 1 Vaughan Avenue Greenhithe Kent DA9 9UU Proposal Erection of a satellite dish on rear elevation (retrospective application)Ward GreenhitheDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00561/LDC Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 58 Princes View Dartford Kent DA1 1RJ Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed stationing of a mobile home in rear

garden

Ward BrentDecision Permission RequiredOfficer Matthew Apperley

Page 8 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00600/FUL Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 18 Lingfield Avenue Dartford Kent DA2 6AH Proposal Demolition of existing rear conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extensionWard NewtownDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00618/PDE Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 20 Mildred Close Dartford Kent DA1 1XP Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward NewtownDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00619/LDC Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 10 Brackendene Wilmington Kent DA2 7NB Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed dormer window in rear elevation and

roof lights in front elevation in connection with providing additional rooms in the roof space

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00622/FUL Date Issued 25/05/2017Location 13 Orchard Close Longfield Kent DA3 7JP Proposal Erection of single storey detached garden roomWard Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00502/FUL Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 52 Hanbury Walk Bexley Kent DA5 2JJ Proposal Erection of a rear conservatoryWard Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00671/PDE Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 9 Portman Close Bexley Kent DA5 2AQ Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for erection of a rear conservatory

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 9 of 22

Plan Ref 16/00918/CDNA Date Issued 15/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St Clements WayProposal Submission of details relating to external materials pursuant to condition 6 planning permission

DA/14/01344/FUL and condition 4 of planning permission reference 16/01984/VCON for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 17/00489/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location The Ridings Darenth Wood Road Darenth Kent DA2 8AA Proposal Provision of dormer windows and roof lights in front and rear elevations of existing detached

outbuilding and associated alterations including removal of external staircase for conversion of both floors to provide self-contained 2 bed dwelling.

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00699/PDE Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 22 Wilmot Road Dartford Kent DA1 3BA Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward West HillDecision Prior Approval Required and Refused – over-heightOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00197/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 4 East Wing Chapel Drive Dartford Kent DA2 6FL Proposal Provision of additional 2 No. roof lights (1 No. at ground level and 1 No. at 2nd floor level)Ward StoneDecision Application PermittedOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 17/00198/LBC Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 4 East Wing Chapel Drive Dartford Kent DA2 6FL Proposal Application for listed building consent for provision of additional 2 No. roof lights (1 No. at ground

level and 1 No. at 2nd floor level

Ward StoneDecision Consent for LBOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 17/00623/LDC Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 2 Bankside Close Bexley Kent DA5 2HE Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the demolition of existing garage and proposed

erection of a detached garage

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Permission Required – height exceeds 2.5m within 2m of the boundaryOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 10 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00508/LDC Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 22 Summerhouse Drive Bexley Kent DA5 2HPProposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for proposed alterations to roof from hip end to gable

end for provision of a dormer window in rear elevation and roof lights in front elevation in connection with providing additional rooms in the roof space

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 17/00573/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St ClementsProposal Submission of details relating to sustainable drainage scheme (SUDS) pursuant to condition 13 of

planning permission DA/14/01344/FUL and condition 6 of planning permission reference 16/01984/VCON for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 16/01524/LBC Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 1 Bullace Lane Dartford Kent DA1 1BB Proposal Application for Listed Building Consent for conversion of property to form 2 No 2 bed houses and 1

No. 1 bed house together with associated parking and alterations to elevations

Ward TownDecision Consent for LBOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 16/01442/COU Date Issued 11/05/2017Location Land At Dartford Clay Shooting Club Joyce Green Gun Club Joyce Green Lane Dartford Kent Proposal Change of use of land from agriculture to motor cycle training & practice use for use by JG Motoxclubs

use only

Ward Joyce GreenDecision Application Refused - Inappropriate development that would appear intrusive and incongruous within

this rural Green Belt location. Unacceptable impact on biodiversity and the recreational value of the marshes.


Plan Ref 16/01354/CDNA Date Issued 15/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St Clements WayProposal Submission of details relating to landscape scheme pursuant to condition 5 planning permission

DA/14/01344/FUL for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works."


Page 11 of 22

Plan Ref 16/01793/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Empire Paper Mills Sports Ground Rear Of 25 Knockhall Road Greenhithe Kent Proposal Submission of details (phase 1 only) relating to foundation designs and archaeological scheme of work

pursuant to conditions 5 and 6 of outline planning permission DA/12/01325/OUT (granted on appeal) and archaeological scheme of work pursuant to condition 3 of planning permission DA/15/01497/REM for redevelopment of the site to comprise up to 40 residential dwellings, provision of public open space, parking, access and landscaping. retention of the bowling green and relocation and enhancement of bowling club facilities and car parking.

Ward GreenhitheDecision Approval of Details for ConditionsOfficer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 16/01817/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Empire Paper Mills Sports Ground Rear Of 25 Knockhall Road Greenhithe Kent Proposal Submission of details (phase 1 only) relating to existing and proposed levels of land and buildings

pursuant to condition 7 of outline planning permission DA/12/01325/OUT (granted on appeal) for redevelopment of the site to comprise up to 40 residential dwellings, provision of public open space, parking, access and landscaping. retention of the bowling green and relocation and enhancement of bowling club facilities and car parking.


Plan Ref 16/01799/NONMAT Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Empire Paper Mills Sports Ground Rear Of 25 Knockhall Road Greenhithe Kent Proposal Application for a non material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/15/01497/REM

to facilitate a phased scheme of works, via amending the wording on conditions 2,3,4,6,8,10,11,12,14 and 15 on planning permission DA/15/01497/REM

Ward GreenhitheDecision Approval of non-material amendmentsOfficer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 16/01820/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Empire Paper Mills Sports Ground Rear Of 25 Knockhall Road Greenhithe Kent Proposal Submission of details (phase 1 only) relating to external materials pursuant to condition 10 of outline

planning permission DA/12/01325/OUT (granted on appeal) for redevelopment of the site to comprise up to 40 residential dwellings, provision of public open space, parking, access and landscaping. retention of the bowling green and relocation and enhancement of bowling club facilities and car parking.


Plan Ref 16/01821/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Empire Paper Mills Sports Ground Rear Of 25 Knockhall Road Greenhithe Kent Proposal Submission of details relating to reptile mitigation pursuant to condition 11 of outline planning

permission DA/12/01325/OUT (granted on appeal) for redevelopment of the site to comprise up to 40 residential dwellings, provision of public open space, parking, access and landscaping. retention of the bowling green and relocation and enhancement of bowling club facilities and car parking.


Page 12 of 22

Plan Ref 16/00466/CDNA Date Issued 15/05/2017Location St Clements ValleyProposal Submission of details relating to a phasing/landscaping details part pursuant to Condition 7 of

Planning Permission DA/12/01404/FUL for erection of 187 dwellings extending to between 2 and 3 storeys in height, including 132 houses and 55 flats, together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 17/00346/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location The Woodyard Whitehill Road Southfleet Kent Proposal Submission of details relating to external lighting pursuant to condition 11 of planning permission

DA/16/01251/FUL for provision of a back-up electricity generation facility


Plan Ref 17/00497/FUL Date Issued 19/05/2017Location 12 Western Cross Close Greenhithe Kent DA9 9LT Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension including demolition of existing conservatoryWard GreenhitheDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00504/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 33 Cranford Road Dartford Kent DA1 1JP Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension and conversion of existing side store to habitable room

incorporating raising height of roof and associated alterations

Ward PrincesDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00317/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 281 Lowfield Street Dartford Kent DA1 1LB Proposal Erection of a detached three bedroom house with associated off street parking for existing and proposed

house and repositioned vehicle crossover

Ward PrincesDecision Application PermittedOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00331/FUL Date Issued 05/05/2017Location 34 Powell Avenue Darenth Kent DA2 6NT Proposal Conversion of integral garage into habitable room with associated alterations to front elevationWard Bean & DarenthDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Page 13 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00446/FUL Date Issued 16/05/2017Location 217 Dartford Road Dartford Kent DA1 3HA Proposal Erection of a retaining wall in rear gardenWard HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00585/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 50 Fairlight Cross Longfield Kent DA3 7JD Proposal Conversion of existing integral garage into a habitable room with associated alterations to front elevation

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00587/FUL Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 13 Royal Road Hawley Kent DA2 7RD Proposal Erection of a single storey side and rear extensionWard Sutton At Hone & HawleyDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00598/LDC Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 30 Gothic Close Wilmington Kent DA1 1PR Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed extension of rear dormer window and

provision of roof lights in front elevation in connection with providing additional rooms in roof space

Ward WilmingtonDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 16/01553/VCON Date Issued 03/05/2017Location Land Adjacent The Lodges (now Gantry Place) Cotton Lane Stone KentProposal Erection of 16 No. 4 bedroom houses in four terraces and erection of a multi-use community building

with access roads and ancillary works and use of land to the west as outdoor camping ground and recreational space for Scout Groups, Duke of Edinburgh activities and youth related activities (incorporating variation of condition 2 of application reference 15/01688/VCON to allow the addition ofan electricity sub station and revised parking layout for the multi-use hall).

Ward StoneDecision Application approved – proposals would respect the character and appearance of the street scene and

wider locality; they would not harm any residential amenity and they would not lead to any parking, congestion or highway safety issues.


Plan Ref 16/01739/FUL Date Issued 26/05/2017Location Kent Football Club Rear Of Glentworth Club Lowfield Street Dartford DA1 1JB Proposal Erection of a 50 seater stand, 50 person standing enclosure, pitch perimeter barrier, turnstile, clubhouse,

toilet block, dugout, hard-standing, shed/store and re-location of pitch with associated car parking and flood lights (part retrospective)

Ward PrincesDecision Application PermittedOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Page 14 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00534/TRCON Date Issued 19/05/2017Location Hook Green Lodge Hook Green Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9NQ Proposal Notification of proposal to fell 3 No. Leylandii trees within Hook Green Conservation AreaWard Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00577/FUL Date Issued 25/05/2017Location 2 Roseberry Gardens Dartford Kent DA1 2NX Proposal Erection of a single storey side extension and conversion of existing integral garage into habitable roomWard West HillDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00385/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location Land At Broadditch Farm New Barn Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9PU Proposal Provision of an energy storage facility to provide energy balancing services to the National GridWard Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application Refused - Inappropriate development in the Green BeltOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00445/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 10 Edwin Road Wilmington Kent DA2 7DJ Proposal Erection of a two storey side extension and single storey rear extensionWard WilmingtonDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00450/CDNA Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Agricultural Bungalow At Highfield Farm Betsham Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9PD Proposal Submission of details relating to contaminated land assessment pursuant to condition 4 of planning

permission DA/16/00300/P3Q for application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is requiredfor change of use from agricultural building to one dwelling house (Class C3) and associated development


Plan Ref 17/00423/ADV Date Issued 03/05/2017Location Dartford Grammar School For Boys West Hill Dartford Kent DA1 2HW Proposal Display of 2 No. non illuminated free standing name signsWard West HillDecision Consent for Advert.Officer Jaspreet Bansil

Page 15 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00340/VCON Date Issued 15/05/2017Location Hawley Mill Hawley Road Hawley Kent DA2 7SY Proposal Provision of 22 No. dormer windows to create additional office space and installation of external fire

escape stairs and solar panels. Construction of hard stand car parking area to provide 72 parking spaces (incorporating variation of condition 2 of application reference 16/00454/FUL to allow the addition of extra solar panels).

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision Application approved – proposals would respect the character and appearance of the building and the

wider locality.Officer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 17/00588/FUL Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 38 Fawkham Avenue Longfield Kent DA3 7HF Proposal Erection of front garden walls and entrance gatesWard Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00590/P3Q Date Issued 22/05/2017Location Land Adjacent Cricket Club Highcross Road Southfleet Kent Proposal Application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted

Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for change of use from agricultural building to one dwelling and associated development

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Prior Approval Required and Refused – not permitted developmentOfficer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 17/00594/FUL Date Issued 25/05/2017Location Berris Southfleet Road Bean Kent DA2 8BS Proposal Erection of a single storey rear/side extension and provision of a dormer window in rear elevation in

connection with providing additional rooms in the roof space

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00595/LDC Date Issued 25/05/2017Location Foxwood House 2A Beacon Drive Bean DA2 8BEProposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed erection of a detached outbuildingWard Bean & DarenthDecision Planning Permission not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00596/FUL Date Issued 26/05/2017Location Marringdean Main Road Longfield Kent DA3 7AGProposal Erection of a single storey side extension and provision of a pitched roof over existing two storey flat

roof

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Page 16 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00601/TPO Date Issued 26/05/2017Location Dartford East Health Centre Pilgrims Way Dartford Kent DA1 1QY Proposal Application to reduce crowns by 1.5m in height and 1m from lateral spread of 2 No. Horse Chestnut

trees (T1 & T2) subject to Tree Preservation Order No.2 1972

Ward BrentDecision Consent for TPOOfficer Jaspreet Bansil

Plan Ref 17/00609/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 2, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 20 And 23 Barker Fields Southfleet Kent Proposal Provision of a garage doors to the open end of the existing car barnsWard Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mr P Nicholls

Plan Ref 17/00455/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location Woodlands Southfleet Avenue Longfield Kent DA3 7JG Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension incorporating conversion of detached garage into habitable

room and linking it to main house

Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00530/FUL Date Issued 17/05/2017Location 7 Caspian Way Swanscombe Kent DA10 0LB Proposal Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension and additional

window to side elevation

Ward SwanscombeDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Lavery

Plan Ref 17/00451/CDNA Date Issued 11/05/2017Location Agricultural Barn Highfield Farm Betsham Road Southfleet Kent DA13 9PD Proposal Submission of details relating to external materials pursuant to condition 2 of planning permission

DA/16/01329/P3Q for application under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as to whether prior approval is required for change of use from agricultural building to two dwelling houses (Class C3) and associated development


Plan Ref 17/00566/FUL Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 3 Brent Close Dartford Kent DA2 6DD Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extension and first floor side/part rear extensionWard NewtownDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 17 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00521/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 14 Lavinia Road Dartford Kent DA1 1TS Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extensionWard NewtownDecision Application PermittedOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00525/LDC Date Issued 17/05/2017Location 217 Coombfield Drive Darenth Kent DA2 7LF Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for proposed alterations to roof from hip end to gable

end for provision of a dormer window in rear elevation and roof lights in front elevation in connection with providing additional rooms in the roof space

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision Permission Required – The proposal is not permitted development and therefore requires planning

permission.Officer Matthew Apperley

Plan Ref 17/00547/FUL Date Issued 08/05/2017Location 57 Devon Road Sutton At Hone Kent DA4 9AA Proposal Erection of a single storey rear extensionWard Sutton At Hone & HawleyDecision Application WithdrawnOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00556/LDC Date Issued 15/05/2017Location Radha Krishna Pencroft Drive Dartford Kent DA1 2PB Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed erection of a single storey side

extension

Ward West HillDecision Permission Required – extends beyond rear wall of original dwelling house by more than 4m.Officer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00510/FUL Date Issued 11/05/2017Location 13 Broad Lane Wilmington Kent DA2 7AQ Proposal Provision of a dormer window in side elevation and roof lights in side elevations in connection with

providing additional rooms in the roof space and erection of an entrance porch

Ward WilmingtonDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Lavery

Plan Ref 17/00548/FUL Date Issued 15/05/2017Location 31 Knole Road Dartford Kent DA1 3JN Proposal Erection of single storey side/rear extension and part conversion of existing garage to habitable room

incorporating increase in height of existing garage and re-position of side elevation window

Ward HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 18 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00572/FUL Date Issued 25/05/2017Location Opposite Old West Barn Westwood Farm Highcross Road Southfleet DA13 9PHProposal Erection of a detached storage building (retrospective application)Ward Longfield, New Barn & SouthfleetDecision Application Refused - Harmful in principle to the reason for including the land within the Metropolitan

Green Belt, and on its openness.Officer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00908/OBB Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 41 Baldwyns Park Bexley Kent DA5 2BE Proposal Consultation on an application for erection of a first floor rear extension within Bexley London BoroughWard Outside Borough BoundaryDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00868/NONMAT Date Issued 26/05/2017Location Dartford Grammar School For Boys West Hill Dartford Kent DA1 2HW Proposal Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/15/01574/FUL

in respect of increased depth of extension to south elevation together with covered canopy, removal of brise soleil to north and east elevations and changes to glazing to north and south elevations

Ward West HillDecision Refusal of non-material amendments – increase in volume and changes to the use of the extensionOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00790/EDCCON Date Issued 03/05/2017Location Old Service Station Watling Street Bean Kent DA2 8AH Proposal Consultation on an application for approval of conditions 4 & 5 attached to planning permission

reference no. EDC/16/0018 relating to drainage system details and scheme of improvements within Ebbsfleet development Corporation

Ward Bean & DarenthDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mrs Sonia Bunn

Plan Ref 17/00791/CPO Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Sutton At Hone C Of E Primary School Church Road Sutton At Hone Kent DA4 9EX Proposal Application under regulation 3 for proposed demolition and replacement of existing pool enclosureWard Sutton At Hone & HawleyDecision No ObjectionOfficer Patricia Coyle

Plan Ref 17/00792/CPO Date Issued 11/05/2017Location Zone C Plot 2 Former Littlebrook Business Centre Artillery Street Dartford Kent Proposal Consultation on an application for details of a scheme to deal with the risks of contamination on the

site pursuant to condition 4 of planning permission DA/16/1459

Ward LittlebrookDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mr P Nicholls

Page 19 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00769/NONMAT Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 33 Roseberry Gardens Dartford Kent DA1 2NX Proposal Application for a non material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/16/00551/FUL

in respect of addition of rooflight in north roof slope and reduction and alteration to front canopy

Ward West HillDecision Approval of non-material amendmentsOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00836/CPO Date Issued 23/05/2017Location The Brent Primary School London Road Stone Kent DA2 6BA Proposal Consultation on an application for details of a specification and timetable for ecological work, pursuant

to condition 9 of planning permission DA/16/1565

Ward StoneDecision No ObjectionOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00851/OBB Date Issued 25/05/2017Location 57 Top Dartford Road Hextable Kent Proposal Consultation on an application for demolition of existing buildings and erection of five detached 5

bedroom dwellings within Sevenoaks District Council

Ward Outside Borough BoundaryDecision No ObjectionOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00818/NONMAT Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 206 Birchwood Road Wilmington Kent DA2 7HA Proposal Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/16/00447/FUL

in respect of removal of roof level accommodation, part external wall finish alteration from render to hung tiles, adjustment to front elevation opening, omission of north elevation openings in favour of new roof light and adjustment to proposed front boundary treatment design

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Refusal of non-material amendments – materially different to that previously approved. Additionally the

front boundary wall would be higher than that previously approved.Officer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00821/OBB Date Issued 23/05/2017Location 111 Caxton Close Hartley Kent Proposal Consultation on an application for erection of a two storey side extension within Sevenoaks District

Council

Ward Outside Borough BoundaryDecision No ObjectionOfficer Abigail Lavery

Plan Ref 17/00657/FUL Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 15 Orchard Avenue Dartford Kent DA1 2PP Proposal Erection of a first floor side extension and part two/part single storey rear extensionWard HeathDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 20 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00777/EDCCON Date Issued 03/05/2017Location Phase 3A Castle Hill Eastern Quarry Watling Street Swanscombe Kent Proposal Consultation on an application for approval of condition 3 attached to planning permission reference no.

15/01881/ECREM relating to surface water drainage details within Ebbsfleet Development Corporation

Ward GreenhitheDecision No ObjectionOfficer Sonia Bunn

Plan Ref 17/00761/PDE Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 1 Capel Place Wilmington Kent DA2 7PU Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward WilmingtonDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Plan Ref 17/00762/CPO Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Stone Pit 1 Cotton Lane Stone Kent Proposal Consultation on a section 73 application to vary condition 1 of planning permission DA/13/140 to

allow the continuation of restoration operations until 31 May 2020

Ward StoneDecision No ObjectionOfficer Steven Bell

Plan Ref 17/00763/PDE Date Issued 30/05/2017Location 60 Trebble Road Swanscombe Kent DA10 0EB Proposal Determination pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 1 (Class A.1 (g) of the Town and Country Planning


Ward SwanscombeDecision Prior Approval Not RequiredOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00503/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St Clements Way Proposal Submission of details relating to boundary walls and fences or any other means of enclosure pursuant to

condition 17 of planning permission DA/14/01344/FUL and condition 10 of planning permission reference 16/01984/VCON for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 17/00628/FUL Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 57 Tile Kiln Lane Bexley Kent DA5 2JE Proposal Erection of first floor side and rear extensionWard Joydens WoodDecision Application PermittedOfficer Abigail Greenaway

Page 21 of 22

Plan Ref 17/00898/NONMAT Date Issued 26/05/2017Location 53 Pinewood Place Dartford Kent DA2 7WN Proposal Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission DA/17/00039/FUL

in respect of replacement of 3 small sky lights with 1 large sky light

Ward Joydens WoodDecision Approval of non-material amendmentsOfficer Mrs B Lidster

Plan Ref 17/00494/CDNA Date Issued 05/05/2017Location Phase 2 Land At St Clements Way Proposal Submission of details relating to footpath adjacent plot 20 pursuant to condition 16 of planning

permission DA/14/01344/FUL and condition of planning permission reference 16/01984/VCON for erection of 156 dwellings comprising 47 houses and 109 flats and 160 sqm of flexible commercial space, class A1, A2 and B1 uses together with the provision of associated public realm and landscaping, parking and infrastructure works


Plan Ref 17/00367/OBB Date Issued 17/05/2017Location Tilbury Power Station Proposal Consultation on draft environmental impact assessment (EIA) scoping report for proposed new port

terminal


Page 22 of 22

control board development

Documents