Contact your Parish Council
Maidstone Holy Trinity Conservation Area
Management Plan
Maidstone Borough Council
DRAFT FOR ADOPTION
February 2010
Contents
|
I |
Introduction |
3 |
|
II |
The Conservation Area Appraisal |
3 |
|
III |
Policy Background |
4 |
|
IV |
Proposed Boundary Changes |
5 |
|
V |
Principles for Development Control |
27 |
|
VI |
Enhancement Proposals |
29 |
|
VII |
Review and Practice Procedures |
32 |
|
VIII |
Action Plan Summary |
32 |
|
|
||
|
Appendix |
Maps |
|
Holy Trinity Conservation Area Management Plan
I Introduction
Section 71 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires local authorities, from time to time, to formulate and publish policies and proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas. Section 69 of the 1990 Act also imposes the duty on the local authority to determine from time to time whether any further parts of the borough should be included within a conservation area.
Recent guidance from English Heritage (Guidance on the Management of Conservation Areas) published in February 2006 suggests that proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas should take the form of a mid- to long-term strategy setting objectives for addressing issues and recommendations for action arising from a previously published conservation area appraisal and identifying any further or more detailed work needed for their implementation. Such a strategy is generally given the title of a conservation area management plan.
It is important to note that a conservation area management plan cannot, of itself, introduce entirely new planning policies. Instead it will need to refer back to the original legislation; to government guidance (mainly Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 for listed buildings and, to a lesser extent, Planning Policy Guidance Note 16 relating to archaeology); to approved structure plan and local plan policies; and to the emerging Local Development Framework. It can interpret established legislative provisions and planning policies and explain how they will be applied within the conservation area to ensure its preservation and/or enhancement. If any particular issues are identified which do require new policies to be drawn up, the management plan can indicate these and set a programme for their development as part of the Local Development Framework process.
This Management Plan for Maidstone Holy Trinity Conservation Area sets out the means proposed for addressing the issues identified in Section IV of the Maidstone Holy Trinity Conservation Area Appraisal and outlines the proposals for boundary changes as also suggested by the Appraisal.
II The Conservation Area Appraisal
This Management Plan follows from the Holy Trinity Conservation Area Appraisal which was adopted in October 2007. The purpose of the Appraisal document is to provide a thorough analysis of the character of the existing conservation area from whose conclusions important aspects to be addressed by the Management Plan should follow.
The Holy Trinity Conservation Area Appraisal presented the following conclusions:
- The current Conservation Area exhibits a consistency in its character, with the majority of its buildings evolving as part of late Georgian/early Victorian residential development.
- The major threats to the character of the Conservation Area in the past have been the demolition of properties to accommodate car parking and the cumulative impact of small inappropriate changes to individual buildings. An Article 4(2) Direction has been instituted to help slow insensitive alterations. Further loss of minor features which provide local distinctiveness should be avoided.
- Redevelopment should target buildings which offer a negative or neutral impact on the overall character of the area and should be of a sensitive scale and design to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area.
- A programme of enhancement to the Conservation Area would include the improvement of paving, the reinstatement of important features, the replacement or removal of inappropriate shopfronts and signs, and the improvement of road signs and lighting.
- There is justification for the consideration of extending the existing boundaries of the Conservation Area to include parts of the immediate surroundings which share the character of buildings and spaces currently within the designated area.
This Conservation Area Management Plan addresses these conclusions.
III Policy Background
Planning Policy Guidance Note 15
National policy and advice regarding conservation area matters is given in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 – Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15). Paragraph 4.2 of PPG15 points out that the quality and interest of areas rather than individual buildings is the prime consideration in identifying conservation areas and that conservation policy should address the quality of the townscape in its broadest sense as well as the protection of individual buildings. It suggests that a wide range of factors can contribute to the special character of conservation areas – for example, the historic layout of property boundaries and roads/streets/paths; the mix of uses; characteristic materials; appropriate scaling and detailing of new buildings; the quality of advertisements, shopfronts and street furniture; the nature of hard and soft surfaces; vistas along streets and between buildings; and the impact of traffic.
Paragraph 4.3 of PPG15 goes on to identify the importance of keeping the boundaries of existing conservation areas under periodic review to ascertain whether any changes are required.
Paragraph 4.5 of PPG 15 suggests that designation of a conservation area in itself is unlikely to be effective without the formulation of specific policy guidance, and paragraph 4.9 reminds local planning authorities of the duty imposed on them by Section 71 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to formulate and publish proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas and for these to be submitted to a “public meeting” in the area. Paragraph 4.16 points out that such proposals cannot realistically seek to prevent all new development and should instead concentrate on the controlled and positive management of change; indeed, it is suggested that there may be instances where redevelopment will be a means of enhancing character.
The South East Plan
The approved Strategic Plan is the South East Plan, published in May 2009. Policies within it which are relevant to all conservation areas in the region are:-
- Policy BE1 – This policy applies generally, not just within conservation areas. It requires local authorities to promote and support design solutions for new developments which are relevant to their context and respect local character and distinctiveness; it also encourages the sensitive re-use of redundant or under-used historic buildings.
- Policy BE6 – This policy requires local authorities to adopt policies which protect, conserve and, where appropriate, enhance the historic environment and the contribution it makes to local distinctiveness.
The Maidstone Local Development Framework
Maidstone Borough Council has begun the preparation of its Local Development Framework which will form the successor to the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000. A supplementary planning document to cover conservation areas has not yet been produced, and whilst this Management Plan indicates how national and local policies will be applied in the on-going management of the conservation area, it is not in itself a planning policy document and does not form part of the Local Development Framework. Only some of the policies in the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000 continue to form part of the Development Plan since 28th September 2007 – these are known as “Saved Policies”. No policies specific to conservation areas are included within these Saved Policies.
However, much of the Conservation Area is subject to Policy R9, which is a Saved Policy. This relates to tertiary town centre areas and provides for a mix of uses considered as suitable for such areas – Class A1 (Shops), Class A2 (Hotels/Guest Houses), Class C3 (Dwelling Houses), Class D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) and Class Ds (Assembly and Leisure). The acceptability of any use is further judged against its contribution to the vitality of the area and its potential impact on residential amenity. Loss of residential accommodation will be resisted under this policy.
IV Changes to the Boundary
As summarised in the conclusion of the Conservation Area Appraisal, the Holy Trinity Conservation Area “is a fine example of the late Georgian expansion of Maidstone, a period when the town first started to outgrow the confines of the medieval settlement. It exhibits a very consistent character in the terms of building materials, scale, architectural style and layout, and development of the area was more or less completed within the 50 years between 1800 and 1850.”
Based on this character summary, only one part of the existing Conservation Area is recommended for exclusion. The demolition of the former West Kent General Hospital on Marsham Street was an unfortunate loss of a historic building important to the character of the area. Hengist Court – the sheltered housing facility which replaced the hospital in the 1980s – was noted in the Appraisal as having a negative impact on the character of the Conservation Area. The development is out of scale with the area, of a poor design and contains details which are out of keeping with the character of the surrounding historical environment. As it offers little of merit to the streetscape, the site is suggested for exclusion from the Holy Trinity Conservation Area.
The areas to be considered for inclusion in the Conservation Area are part of this same historical development. Most of the buildings which fall within the proposed extension area were built in the first half of the 19th century as part of Maidstone’s residential growth. They illustrate the contemporary development of lower status housing necessary to accommodate the wide range of tradesmen, etc. necessary to service the needs of the grander households in the area and the town as a whole.
What follows is a street-by-street building analysis of the proposed extension area. See Maps 1 – 3 to further identify the area.
Building Analysis
A detailed description of all buildings and sites proposed to be included in boundary revisions for the Conservation Area follows. These descriptions are based on examination from the street and historic map analysis. Buildings have not been examined internally or from non-public viewpoints.
In addition to a physical description, buildings and structures have been assessed according to their potential value to the character of the Conservation Area. They have been graded as follows:
· Essential - buildings/sites which, because of their high historic architectural interest or townscape function, must be retained.
· Positive - buildings/sites which would make a positive contribution to the character and interest of the Conservation Area and whose retention should be encouraged wherever possible. Some buildings in this grade may have suffered from unsympathetic alteration but could be restored to their original appearance relatively easily.
· Neutral - buildings/sites which do not harm the character of the area but whose retention is not necessary.
· Negative - buildings/sites which harm the area’s character and where redevelopment would be advantageous.
Brewer Street – This road was likely built between 1823 and 1848. By 1848, much of the north side of the street was developed. With a few exceptions, most of the buildings proposed for inclusion in the Conservation Area were completed by the middle of the 19th century.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
43 |
Unlisted |
Long, two-storey corner dwelling that is likely contemporary to the attached to the terrace next-door (ca. 1840). Yellow stock brick, mostly rendered and painted white. Interesting brick detailing to corner. First floor has four Victorian sash windows and one blank. Ground floor has inappropriate modern windows which replaced late-19th / early-20th century shop windows and are out of proportion with the building. Two doors to Woollett Street share arched brick detailing of the terrace next door. Single storey extension within walled yard visible from Woollett Street (wall of some age). |
Positive |
|
45-51 (odd) |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1840, two-storey terraced houses. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond; no. 45 rendered and painted white to match corner house (43 Brewer Street). Doors and windows are modern replacements. Window replacements have removed the original surrounds; currently lintels are soldier courses. Doors have lost their fanlights but retain their brick arches. 47 & 49 retain their iron handrails. Handed brick chimney stacks. Satellite dishes to front facades are an unfortunate modern intrusion. |
Positive |
|
53-63 (odd) |
Unlisted |
Although present-day details give little indication of age, this terrace appears to be later than the ca. 1840 cottages which surround them and possibly dates from the 1870s. Rendered façade. No details to fenestration visible. Windows and doors are modern replacements. Number 63 extends three bays plus a flat-roof extension along Camden Street; wedged lintels to ground floor windows apparent to this elevation. Satellite dishes are an unfortunate intrusion. |
Positive |
|
63a (former Chapel) |
Unlisted |
Late 19th-century chapel likely built on the site of two terraced cottages. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond, upper gable of front elevation inappropriately re-laid in stretcher bond. Unfortunately mostly in so-called “weatherstruck” cement-based render. Cogged brick eaves detailing. Three-by-four bays with rear lean-to. Rectangular sunken tablet in front gable but with no inscription. Front windows and door with Moorish brick arches. Side windows with contrasting brick arches, lower casements in uPVC. Gothic detailing to upper lights of front and side windows. Windows now contain some casement lights. Rear windows are casements. Original door has been replaced. |
Positive |
|
65 – 71 (odd) |
Unlisted |
A terrace of two-storey dwellings, from ca. 1840. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond. Number 71 rendered. Doors embellished with simple brick arches. Regular fenestration with one window per floor. Windows – all modern replacements – have wedged stone lintels, though those to ground floors of 69 and 71 lost due to changes resulting from window replacements. No. 71 now has shopfront window. Nos 69 and 71 most significantly altered overall. |
Positive |
|
73 |
Unlisted |
Built as a public house in 1885. Three storeys, red brick in English bond. Ground floor painted with other modern alterations. String courses decorate the façade with some polychrome brick features, including corner quoins above the main entrance. Modillion cornice to ground floor. First floor windows have gauged brick lintels, those to the second floor are capped by stone lintels. Windows are modern replacements. Coped gables. Clay tile roof with 3 red brick chimney stacks. Intrusive aluminium exhaust unit above a one-storey flat-roof extension to Wheeler Street side. Formerly Ancient Druids Public House, now a restaurant (the Spice Hut). |
Positive |
|
6 |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1895. A three-bay, three-storey building in yellow stock brick with red brick details, including quoins and strong courses. Ground floor rendered to resemble rusticated stone. Two-over-two sash windows with unusual top lights. Windows have bracketed lintels and sills in stone; those to central bay are blanks. Front door with side and top lights appears to be original. Remnants of painted sign to west elevation for “J.H. Bridge”, bricklayers; lancet window of more recent installation on the same façade. Hipped roof with rear extension to western end. Central carriage entrance with access doors and shop windows leads to an interesting cluster of service structures of roughly the same age. The brick stable/coachhouse building to the rear with lunette windows is particularly characterful despite concrete roof tiles. |
Positive |
|
8 |
Unlisted |
Probably ca. 1875-80. Two-storey dwelling in ragstone
rubble with ashlar quoins and other detailing. Narrow sash windows with
single horizontal glazing bars to each light. Classical details include four
arcaded windows under bracketed cornice to ground floor. Triple sash |
Positive |
|
28 |
Unlisted |
Offices built in the 1980s. Two storeys with utilised roof space. Façade in modern bricks. Regular fenestration. Despite Georgian-influenced proportions and details, the building slightly dominates the streetscape due to its mass and location on the pavement. |
Neutral |
|
30-54 |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1840 terrace of two-storey dwellings in yellow-stock brick in Flemish bond, many facades rendered and/or painted; number 52 faced in asbestos shingles. Set back from the roadway. Regular fenestration of one window per floor, mostly modern replacements. Carved wedged stone lintels to original windows. Numbers 34, 42, and 48 have inappropriately placed modern windows inserted to first floor. Paired doors with timber entablature and half-round, fluted pilasters. Doors mostly modern replacements with few fanlights retained. Number 32 is the best example of well-maintained historical features. Paired chimney stacks with clay chimney pots intact. Concrete roof tiles. |
Positive |
|
56 (Eagle PH) |
Unlisted |
A building on this corner appears contemporary with the terrace next door (numbers 30-54). A pub since at least 1882. Yellow stock brick with rendered façade to roadways. Regular fenestration of decorative etched casement windows to ground floor, Victorian sash windows to first floor and flat-roof dormers. Eight-over-eight sash window visible to rear elevation. Slate roof. Chimney stack paired with terrace next door, second chimney stack to rear. Rear lean-to of ragstone and yellow stock brick has modern flat-roof extension. |
Positive |
Camden Street – This street was also most likely built between 1823 and 1848. By 1848, the existing buildings were completed, and extended the full length of the street. As indicated in the 1896 Ordnance Survey map, part of the terrace was removed to make way for the railway. These spaces remain open, mostly used today as carparks, with the exception of a wooded area between Woollett and Camden Streets.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
3-27 (odd) & 14-32 (even) |
Unlisted |
Terraced workers’ cottages built ca. 1840 in yellow stock brick (Flemish bond); some facades have been painted and rendered while number 18 has been insensitively clad in mock brick tiles. The area was subject to a refurbishment scheme which replaced all doors and windows, resulting in the loss of original window surrounds (now with soldier-course lintels). Original arched brick doorheads have been retained. Paired chimney stacks, most with chimney pots. Some original iron handrails have been retained. A number of satellite dishes to the facades of odd-numbered houses. Back gardens originally separated from houses by back alleyway (now the alley is located between the back gardens of houses on Woollett Street). |
Positive |
|
Parking area & park |
Unlisted |
A number of houses were removed on both sides of Camden Street to make way for the railway tunnel. Much of this site is now used for car parking but also includes a small wooded area between Camden Street and Woollett Street. |
Parking: Neutral
Park: Positive |
|
3 County Rd |
Unlisted |
Part of the odd-numbered terrace above, this dwelling is larger, likely built as a higher-status house. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond. Regular fenestration with two windows per floor to front; first floor window to Camden Street side has been blocked up. Windows and doors are modern replacements. Arched brick surround to door. Small front garden with low, yellow-stock brick wall. Municipal signs affixed to building detract from its character. |
Positive |
|
34 & 36 |
Unlisted |
The end of the terrace – as above – with ground floor formerly used as a shop until the 1990s. The classical pilasters and fascia have been retained, although modern residential windows have been installed. |
Positive |
County Road – While the road was in existence long before, the historical terraces on County Road first appear on the 1848 Ordnance Survey map so are likely to be roughly contemporary with similar development along Camden, Woollett, and Wheeler Streets.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
5-20 |
Unlisted |
A ca. 1840 residential terrace of yellow stock brick in Flemish bond. Two storeys, one window per floor. Windows and doors are all modern replacements, although modifications retain uniformity as most fixtures are of similar quality and design. Handed doors retain gauged brick arches; window surrounds have been replaced by soldier-course lintels. Other areas of fairly sensitive brick replacement seem in evidence. Some original wrought iron handrails remain, as at numbers 15 and 16. Roofed in slate. Decorative dentil brick course under shallow eaves. Simple paired chimney stacks with chimney pots along roof ridge. Houses were originally separated from their rear gardens by an alleyway. These alleys were removed in the early 20th century and today the view from the public car park indicates that extensions to the terrace have been minimal and fairly uniform in character. Modern vents and wiring on front elevations somewhat detract from the historic character of the terrace but overall this is an attractive example of simple workers’ terraces of the Regency/early Victorian period. |
Positive |
|
21 |
Unlisted |
Part of the above terrace, the façade of this house is rendered and painted white. Windows have painted wedged lintels. Modifications appear to be reversible to restore the symmetry of the terrace’s otherwise uniform character. |
Positive |
|
22-26 |
Unlisted |
Built in the 1980s as offices on an irregular site. Two stories, clad in yellow brick with red-brick details to windows (soldier-course lintels) and doors (arches). Each façade has regular fenestration with modern sash windows. Air conditioning units present an unfortunate intrusion to the important corner facades. Although of modern construction, their scale, symmetrical design, adherence to building line, and simple detailing are considered to preserve the character of the area. |
Neutral |
Lucerne Street – Possibly so named because of Lucerne’s popularity as a tourist destination at the time, the street is shown as existing on the map included in “A Historical Descriptive Account of Maidstone and its Environs” published in 1834. Only the terrace on the south side of the street is indicated on the 1848 Ordnance Survey map. The northern terrace first appears in the 1896 Ordnance Survey map and is not included in this proposed extension to the Conservation Area boundary.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
1-13 |
Unlisted |
Two-storey brick terrace, most facades rendered and/or painted. Originally one sash window per floor, now most modern replacements although original openings remain. No. 3 may retain its original windows and door. Shallow header arched lintels to ground floor window and doors. Dentilled brick eaves detailing. Concrete roof tiles. Roofline changes to adapt to slight incline in the road. Paired central brick chimney stacks with clay pots are retained throughout; the chimney at no. 13 appears to be located on the rear slope of the building. Wires somewhat mar the appearance of this uniform development. |
Positive |
|
14 |
Unlisted |
Later Victorian addition to the ca. 1840s terrace, retaining the two-storey pattern of regular fenestration. Light stock bricks of different colour from those of the terrace, in Flemish bond. Wedged gauged brick lintel to ground floor window and pilastered doorcase with flat hood. Modern half-glazed door. Windows have been replaced with inappropriate PVCu units. Concrete roof tiles. Retains its chimney stack. |
Positive |
Tufton Street – Likely named for Henry Tufton, 11th Earl of Thanet, Lord Lieutenant of Kent from 1840 to 1846, this street is first indicated on the 1848 Ordnance Survey map, and included terraces on both sides of the street. Today, there is modern, out-of-scale development on the south side of Tufton Street, which is not included in the proposed extension. The boundary walls which follow the street as it curves to Union Street are included, however, because of their age and quality.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
1a-1c Tufton St & 23-26 Wyatt St |
Unlisted |
Built in the 1980s as dwellings. Two storeys, one casement window per floor. Yellow brick with red brick soldier-course lintels to ground floor windows. Front doors with small porches. Despite the terrace’s recent construction, its modest scale and symmetrical design are considered to have a neutral impact on the character of the Conservation Area. |
Neutral |
|
1-14 |
Unlisted |
Terrace in yellow stock brick dating from ca. 1840. Two storeys, one window on each floor. Some facades inappropriately rendered and/or painted (see numbers 9-11). Other alterations to the terrace’s symmetry include window and door replacements. Special features which have been retained include dentilled brick eaves detailing, wedged stone lintels over ground floor windows, and brick arches over doorways. Low-pitched, concrete tile roofs with paired chimney stacks surmounted by clay chimney pots. Satellite dishes detract from the historic character. |
Positive |
|
15-25 |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1840s terrace attached to numbers 1-14. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond, although a number of facades have been rendered and painted; 25 is pebble dashed. Dentilled eaves brickwork under concrete tile roofing. Nos. 15-20 all have either a dormer window or rooflight visible to the rear owing to a steeper roof pitch than 21-25. Paired brick chimney stacks. Two storeys with regular fenestration of one window per floor. Ground floor doors and windows have wedged stone lintels. Modern window and door replacements predominate, compromising the historical character of the area. Some window openings and door surrounds have been modified inappropriately, altering the symmetry of the terrace. Numbers 17 and 25 illustrate dramatically this negative impact in contrast with their neighbours, which retain many characteristic features. The presence of satellite dishes and wiring has a negative impact on the character of the area. |
Positive |
|
Boundary walls |
Unlisted |
Built in ragstone and brick, the walls located between numbers 1c and 1 and along both sides of the north-south spur of the street may date back as far as the 1830s and help in the interpretation of historical boundary lines including those of the former West Kent hospital. |
Positive |
Union Street – One of the older streets in central Maidstone, the area under consideration for inclusion in the Conservation Area pre-dates the 1823 map, though how well developed it was at the time is unclear, as terraces are only minimally indicated. By 1848, the rows of terraces on the south side of the street are clearly represented and therefore part of this boundary extension proposal.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
112-138 (even) |
Unlisted |
A row of 2-storey terraced cottages built ca. 1840. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond, although a number of individual cottages are currently painted (as 122 and 124) or rendered (such as 124). Original 12-paned sash windows with wedged carved stone lintels, now painted; good examples of surviving windows at 114, 130 & 136. Unfortunate modern window replacements are prevalent, particularly damaging to character at 116 & 134. Hooded door surrounds unify the area, with each pair surrounded by fluted pilasters, an entablature and cornice. Most doors appear to be replacements, but a few rectangular fanlights survive such as the particularly good example at 130. Roofed in concrete tiles. Most chimney stacks appear original; many chimney pots remain. |
Positive |
|
140-146 (even) |
Unlisted |
Attached to 112-138, this row of cottages was built ca. 1890, appearing to replace an earlier mix of buildings. Flemish bond yellow stock brick. Windows with carved stone lintels and sills, now painted; 140 and 144 have existing 4-paned sash windows with horns. One window per floor with the exception of 140, which has two windows to the first floor. Roofed in concrete tiles with projecting fire walls which contain decorative brickwork under the eaves. Paired chimney stacks with chimney pots. The end of 146 shows evidence of a building long removed, now containing a modern flat-roofed garage. |
Positive |
|
152-158 (even) |
Unlisted |
A ca. 1840 Regency-influenced terrace of four cottages of symmetrical design, named “Adelaide Place” on plaque between 154 & 156, presumably for Queen Adelaide (1792-1849, wife of William IV). Two storeys, yellow stock brick, with regular fenestration, some six over six-paned sash windows surviving. Wedged carved stone lintels similar to those at 112-138, now painted white. Handed doors with decorative white-painted timber surrounds featuring simple pilasters and laurel wreaths. Rectangular fanlights and most original doors survive. Roofed in concrete tiles. Chimney stacks to front and back roof slopes surmounted by chimney pots. End of 158 with plaster finish. This terrace makes an important contribution to the character of the area due to its unusually well intact fine original features. |
Essential |
|
Quaker Meeting House |
Unlisted |
Built in the mid-1970s of modern materials and design, possibly of Scandinavian influence. Essentially a steel-framed hexagon linked to a rectangle, clad in tan industrial brick in stretcher bond. Includes concrete brick boundary wall integral to the design. Copper roof to the hexagon, flat concrete roof to the remainder of the building. While of different design from the surrounding terraces, its low form contributes positively to the area’s character, and is considered appropriate for inclusion because of the strong presence of houses of worship throughout the Conservation Area. The surrounding car park, however, is considered to have a negative impact. |
Neutral |
Wheeler Street – This street appears on the 1823 map but at that time was in the very early stages of residential development with few structures illustrated. However, by 1848, terrace development appears complete on both sides of the street from Union to Lucerne Streets, with the western side developed almost to the Greyhound Public House, which first appears on this map. A building that occupies the site now used as an RSPCA charity shop also appears complete at this time. The terraces north of this building do not appear until the 1896 Ordnance Survey map and are not included in this proposed extension of the Conservation Area. The same map illustrates the loss of some Wheeler Street terrace houses because of railway works. A further 3-4 houses were lost at the Union Street end in the late 20th century; their site is now occupied by a car park.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
Car park between the Former Friends Meeting House & no. 15 |
Unlisted |
Site of a former row of cottages now used as a car park. Would benefit from sensitive redevelopment. |
Negative |
|
15-21 (odd) |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1840 terrace of four cottages. Two storeys, Flemish bond yellow stock brick. While existing windows and doors are modern replacements, their original surrounds remain. Windows have carved, wedged stone lintels, now painted white. Hooded door surrounds in white painted timber with fluted pilasters. Roofed in concrete tiles. Paired ridge stacks surmounted by clay chimney pots. Front gardens have been retained with low fences or hedge. More recent work to the end of number 15 – including an English-bond, red brick façade – shows evidence of late Georgian terraces which have since been removed; the space is now used as a car park. |
Essential |
|
23 (odd) |
Unlisted |
Built roughly contemporary with terrace to which it is attached at 15-21 Wheeler Street, this two storey dwelling is of larger scale than its neighbours. Two-over-two single-glazed sash windows – one to each floor – with carved, wedged stone lintels. Door appears to be original with semi-circular, undecorated glazed fanlight. Arched door surround of classical design with fluting. Well maintained despite loss of chimney stack and use of concrete roof tiles. Adjoins ragstone wall and outbuildings of the Eagle Public House next door. |
Essential |
|
33 |
Unlisted |
Two-storey remnant of an original group of ca. 3 cottages, the others removed when the railway tunnel was built. Yellow-stock brick construction with pebble-dashed front façade. Most prominent side elevation clad in textured modern red brick in a mixture of Flemish and stretcher bond. Site of other terraces now a car park. Windows and doors are modern replacements. |
Neutral |
|
35-75 (odd) |
Unlisted |
A row of ca. 1840 two-storey terraces in yellow stock brick (Flemish bond). Some facades rendered and or painted. Mostly regular fenestration with some modern window insertions as at 37 and 53. Most windows and doors are modern replacements whose quality detracts from the historical character of the area. Some paired doors, many hooded with simple fluted timber surrounds with paterae. Some original window openings with flat gauged brick arches. Many dormer windows – often of inappropriate scale and location. Satellite dishes also present a modern intrusion. Front gardens with low boundary walls mostly of brick and paved with hardstanding. Numbers 49 through 55 illustrate the sharp contrast between better preserved (49 and 51) and more insensitively altered dwellings (53 and 55). |
Positive |
|
Site of 77 (Greyhound Public House) |
Unlisted |
Former inn built in the 1830s as part of the terrace development, recently demolished and in the process of being redeveloped. |
Neutral |
|
72-74 (even) |
Unlisted |
Two-storey ragstone building of unique character on the townscape, possibly with origins in ca. 1840. Carved bargeboard details to front gables with pendants. Most windows are modern timber or uPVC replacements. Much of the ragstone has been inappropriately rendered in birds-beak or ribbon pointing. Prominent brick chimneys, the one closest to Lucerne Street of decorative character. Flat-roof front extension in timber and glazing for retail purposes. Two-storey rear extension in ragstone and brick with brick lean-to (currently painted); side door now bricked up. Unfortunate concrete tiles to the roof. Now used by the RSPCA as a charity shop. |
Essential |
|
Site of 62-70 |
Unlisted |
The open site on the corner is used as a car park and could benefit from careful redevelopment. |
Negative |
|
56-60 (even) |
Unlisted |
A ca. 1840 terrace of three houses, numbers 56 and 58 of two storeys and set back from the roadway with brick boundary walls. Number 60 is three storeys. Most likely of yellow stock brick construction although all are rendered and painted, number 60 also pebble-dashed to upper floors; these treatments are well maintained but disguise much of their character. All windows and doors are modern replacements. Number 60 had been a shop but converted to dwellings in the 1980s. |
Positive |
|
Site of 50-54 |
Unlisted |
The space which occupies this site is currently undeveloped and used as a car park although the site was once occupied by buildings which were demolished in the 1880s for the construction of the railway tunnel. It would benefit from sensitive redevelopment or landscaping. |
Negative |
|
48 |
Unlisted |
A modern dwelling approved for erection in 2006. Two storeys with attic. Clad in yellow brick with uPVC windows and doors. While its scale somewhat dominates the historical former school building next door, it is of a scale similar to some of the terrace houses nearby. |
Neutral |
|
Former British System School |
Unlisted |
Late Georgian former school building in Flemish bond yellow stock brick in “weatherstruck” cement-based render. Stone plaque in gable over front door with the inscription “School on the British System 1823.” Single-glazed, round-headed, timber casement windows to Wheeler Street elevation with simple brick arches. Door surrounded by classically detailed simple pilaster, entablature and cornice in painted timber. Jeffrey Street elevation has had some modifications, including recent brick infill and the addition of a modern corrugated metal garage door, fairly sensitive to the building’s character. Surrounded by a mix of poorly maintained service buildings which would benefit from redevelopment. |
Essential |
Woollett Street – Like its neighbour Camden Street, Woollett Street appears to have been completely developed by 1848, with terraces along its full length. It also lost part of its terraces to make way for a railway tunnel.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
1 |
Unlisted |
Originally part of a long terrace built ca. 1840 in yellow stock brick (Flemish bond). Its fenestration has altered at ground floor although arched brick door surround and wedged stone lintel have been retained. Shares chimney stack with 41 Brewer Street. Side walled garden with public footpath. |
Positive |
|
3-7 (odd) |
Unlisted |
Although part of the original terrace on the western side of the street, the facades have been mostly reconstructed in multicoloured brick. Paired chimney stacks retained but fenestration altered, removing original lintels. Doors and windows are modern replacements. |
Positive |
|
9 |
Unlisted |
The best-preserved example of what all cottages on this late-Regency terrace must have looked like. Yellow stock brick in Flemish bond. Retained features included wedged stone lintel over ground floor window and arched brick surround to door (fanlight no longer present). |
Positive |
|
Garage court between 9 & 11 |
Unlisted |
Unattractive lock-up garages now occupy the site of terraces removed to make way for the railway tunnel. |
Negative |
|
11-15 (odd) & 6-16 (even) |
Unlisted |
Ca. 1840 terraced houses in yellow stock brick, all rendered and painted, thus providing a sense of symmetry. Rendering disguises some original features but brick arches over doors are still apparent, as are original paired chimney stacks with pots. Some iron hand rails remain. Satellite dishes to odd-numbered dwellings detract from their historical character. |
Positive |
|
Parking area & park |
Unlisted |
Small-scale parking area now located where original houses were removed to build the railway tunnel which may benefit from more sensitive use. The park adjoining even-numbered dwellings is an important feature. |
Parking: Neutral
Park: Positive |
|
1 County Rd |
Unlisted |
Attached to the odd-numbered terrace, built as a larger dwelling. Regular fenestration with two windows to ground and first floor, one to attic. One ground-floor window also to side. Rendered with modern window and door replacements as to terrace. Small front garden with low brick wall. |
Positive |
|
The Swan Public House |
Unlisted |
Attached to the even-numbered terrace on Woollett Street, this building is designated as an inn as early as the 1876 Ordnance Survey map but was likely build as part of the ca. 1840 development in yellow stock brick. Currently painted and roofed in concrete tiles. Fascia boarding follows curve of corner. Adaptation to an irregular site has provided the building with added character. The current extent of the building includes what was probable one of the original terraced houses but the main range is of a larger scale. Fenestration has been altered and is now irregular. |
Positive |
|
2 & 4 |
Unlisted |
Originally part of a long terrace of cottages built ca. 1840. Although of yellow stock brick construction, much altered including fenestration. Number 4 is painted and rendered as numbers 6-16. Number 2 has lost its historic character due to the refacing of the façade in modern yellow bricks, the insertion of an additional window, and the addition of a modern red-brick arch. It has also lost its chimney stack. The space created while building the railway tunnel is now used as a car park and small wooded park. |
Positive |
Minor Adjustments – A small adjustment is also proposed to the Conservation Area boundary to the rear of gardens along the north of Brewer Street to accommodate logical property boundaries. Another adjustment would include land between Union and Brewer Streets where a modern development now sits. This site also contains buildings in Starnes Court, most of which were excluded in the initial designation, to follow more logical lines. One additional site is suggested for inclusion on Church Street to include a building which was part of the Cutbush Almshouses development.
|
Address |
Listed/Unlisted |
Description/Comments |
Value to Character |
|
Priory Gate |
Unlisted |
Office development built in the late 1980s. Three storeys with balcony to second floor with Doric columns supporting roof over. Hipped slate roof with deep eaves. Yellow brick with rusticated, rendered ground floor. Red brick string courses and soldier-course detailing to sash windows. Steel Juliet balconies and top-floor railings. Irregular footprint provides a courtyard-like setting. A positive example of sensitive urban development which has revitalised this part of the town. |
Positive |
|
1-4 Starnes Court |
Unlisted |
L-shaped former outbuilding with hipped slate roof, probably originated in the 1870s. Ground floor multicoloured Flemish-bond brick to central courtyard, rendered to rear elevations. Some areas of modern brickwork from conversion of building to mixed retail and offices in the 1980s. First floor weatherboarded in a dark stain. Modern timber-framed casement windows and doors. |
Positive |
|
8-16 Starnes Court |
Unlisted |
Two-storey, mixed-use development with ground floor retail purpose-built in the 1980s in red stretcher-bond brick. Lighter brick quoins to windows, doors and corners. Five weather-boarded gables, three projecting, two of which have bay windows. Timber-framed casement windows and shopfronts of uniform design. Slate roof. Covered veranda. Of modest scale and carefully considered design, this building represents a modern development which harmonises well with its more historical surroundings. |
Neutral |
|
33 Church Street |
Unlisted |
Built ca. 1865, as part of the Cutbush Almshouses development. 3 storeys, front façade in red brick side in yellow stock brick (Flemish bond). Clay tiled roof. Half-hipped gable facing the street with deep moulded brick detail around the eaves. All original windows remain with glazing bars intact – tripartite sashes with narrow margin lights to ground floor, paired timber sliding sashes to first floor, and single sash to second floor. Windows have Gothic Revival arched heads. Original door also remains, with undecorated semi-circular fanlight and gauged brick arch. Iron railings separate front garden from the street. No chimney stack. Modern garage in yellow brick separates this building from the almshouses. Small satellite dish and wires affixed to first floor intrude somewhat on an otherwise well preserved building. |
Essential |
These proposals for boundary changes will be the subject of further consultations with affected residents, landowners and other interested bodies as part of the designation process and will be subject to Member approval. The boundary changes are considered to be of high priority.
V Principles for Development Control
Sensitive and responsive management of development pressure is required in order that new developments do not spoil the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. To this end, the Council will adopt the following principles when dealing with planning applications within the Conservation Area or on sites affecting its setting:-
1. The Council will apply the principles, guidance and regulations set out by the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the more detailed guidance of PPG15 and any subsequent revisions, additions or replacement government guidance.
2. The Council will apply the relevant policies of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan and any relevant saved policies from the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000 until such time as these policies are replaced by policies in the emerging Local Development Framework.
3. The Council will require all planning applications and applications for listed building consent to be supported by a Design and Access Statement. This should be a brief but thorough document setting out the reasons for the development, explaining how the design has been evolved and showing how it will preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area; it should also cover any access issues which exist. In some cases a separate Heritage Statement will also be required.
4. Applications must be accompanied by clear and accurate drawings showing the proposed development in detail and illustrating how it fits in to its context. Drawings should clearly indicate materials to be used in producing the external finish and architectural details of proposed buildings. Site plans should accurately depict the positions of trees on or adjacent to the site and show clearly those which will need to be removed and those which will be retained. The application should include a survey by a professional arboriculturist to comply with current British Standard BS5837, ‘Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations’. It should also include details of any proposed works to, and methods for protecting, any retained tree. Photographs and other illustrative media are encouraged. Any applications which fail to provide adequate detail will not be registered.
5. Outline planning applications will not be accepted for proposals within the Conservation Area or on sites affecting its setting.
6. The Council will make use of technically experienced and qualified officers in guiding the assessment and determination of all applications within the Conservation Area or affecting its setting.
7. The overriding consideration in dealing with any proposal for development will be whether or not it would either preserve or enhance the special character of the Conservation Area. Any proposal which fails to do so will be refused. The Council will not insist on any particular architectural style for new building works, but the quality of the design and its execution will be paramount. The Council encourages the use of high quality contemporary design, subject to proposals being appropriate to their context in terms of scale and use of materials; however, there may be instances where a traditional approach is appropriate – in such case, designs should be high in quality and well-researched, resulting in a scheme which accurately reflects the design, scale, massing, detail and materials of local tradition.
8. In dealing with applications for the redevelopment of existing buildings, the Council will have regard to the detailed building assessments as set out in the Conservation Area Appraisal and in this Management Plan. Except in the most exceptional circumstances, Conservation Area Consent will not be granted for the demolition of buildings identified as being “essential” to the character of the Conservation Area, and is unlikely to be granted for those rated as “positive”; buildings cited as “neutral” may be considered appropriate for redevelopment, subject to the quality of any replacement scheme constituting an improvement over current circumstances; the redevelopment of sites and buildings judged to be “negative” will usually be encouraged so long as any scheme is appropriate to its context. Conservation Area Consent will not normally be granted to demolish buildings in the absence of an approved scheme of redevelopment.
9. New developments should utilise building materials appropriate to the Conservation Area – these are:
a) Yellow stock bricks are the predominant material, but red stock bricks will be appropriate in certain locations.
b) Painted brick.
c) Ragstone.
d) Render.
e) Clay plain tiles or natural slate for roofs.
f) Painted timber windows.
In the case of red stock bricks and tiles it will be important for them to be made of Wealden Clays or clays of similar geological formation. Similarly, yellow stock bricks should be made from Thames Valley clays or clays of similar geological formation.
10. Buildings should respect the predominant scale of buildings in the Conservation Area, which is modest. Buildings should not exceed 3 storeys in height (although attic accommodation may be acceptable). Bungalows will not be considered to be appropriate to the character of the Conservation Area.
11. Developments should preserve trees which are healthy and make a significant contribution to the character of the Conservation Area, whether or not they are protected by a Tree Preservation Order.
12. In dealing with proposals for extensions and other alterations to existing buildings, the Council will have regard to the following considerations:
a) Extensions should normally be of matching materials, design and detailing to the host building, and should be subservient in scale.
b) Dormer windows may be acceptable, depending on their position, number, scale and design. No more than one or two dormers per elevation will normally be considered appropriate and as a general rule a dormer should not occupy more than about one third of the overall height of the roof. Depending on circumstances, dormers should either be covered by a pitched clay tiled roof or, in the case of smaller or shallower roofs, a flat lead roof above a traditionally-detailed cornice. They should not appear crowded together or be located too close to hip or gable lines. Large “box” dormers will not be considered appropriate, neither will dormers which extend above the existing ridge height. In terraces where dormers do not exist already it is unlikely that permission will be given for them on front elevations.
c) Rooflights may be considered acceptable and will be subject to the same provisos as dormers in relation to numbers, position and scale. “Conservation Rooflights” which sit close to the roof slope should be used.
d) Porches can have a disruptive effect on the appearance of regularly designed terraces and semi-detached buildings, and on all buildings if too large or poorly designed. They are likely to be considered inappropriate throughout most of the Conservation Area. In isolated instances where they may be appropriate in principle, porches should be of modest size and be of appropriate design for the building to which they are to be attached. They should not obscure original architectural features such as doorcases and doorhoods.
e) Satellite dishes will only be considered acceptable when they cannot be readily seen from the streets or other public spaces.
f) Boundary enclosures can have a significant effect on the character of the Conservation Area. The most appropriate forms are considered to be hedges, walls of brick or ragstone, or cast iron railings. Close-boarded fences have an unfortunate suburban character and will not normally be considered appropriate except in rear gardens where they are not readily visible from the streets or other public spaces.
VI Enhancement Proposals
Article 4 Directions
The Conservation Area Appraisal revealed that significant damage to the character of the Conservation Area had been occasioned in the past by alterations to unlisted single dwelling houses carried out under permitted development rights granted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (GPDO). Such alterations include re-roofing in inappropriate materials and replacement windows and doors of inappropriate design or materials (they are often in uPVC). Whilst individually such alterations may be minor, their cumulative impact is substantial.
Articles 4(1) and 4(2) of the GPDO enable local planning authorities to make directions to withdraw such permitted development rights. Directions under Article 4(1) can be applied to any land and any type of building and can remove any permitted development right specified in the Direction; a Direction under Article 4(1) needs to be approved by the Secretary of State.
Article 4(2) Directions can only be made within conservation areas, and can only apply to single dwelling houses and their ancillary buildings. The individual permitted development rights which can be removed are limited to specified classes of development and only those parts of buildings which front onto highways, waterways or open spaces can be covered by an Article 4(2) Direction. However, there is no need to obtain the approval of the Secretary of State.
Government guidance on the use of Article 4 Directions is given in Department of the Environment Circular 9/95, which states that permitted development rights should only be withdrawn where firm evidence exists that damage to the character and appearance of a conservation area is likely to take place or is already taking place because of the exercise of such rights. Such evidence has been obtained in the production of the Conservation Area Appraisal.
Holy Trinity Conservation Area is already protected by an Article 4(2) Direction. Should the proposed boundary extension be approved, the Council would seek to extend the Article 4(2) Direction to the entire area as the areas up for consideration have already suffered a fair amount of erosion of character due to insensitive minor development such as the installation of dormer windows, satellite dishes, plastic doors and windows, inappropriate façade treatments, and hardstanding to front gardens. Given the lack of listed buildings in the proposed extension area, this Article 4(2) Direction would be an important tool in the preservation and enhancement of the character of the area. The Council would seek the Article 4(2) Direction as a matter of urgency subsequent to any approval of the boundary extension proposal.
Enforcement Strategy
Unauthorised development may seriously harm the character of the Conservation Area as well as causing other problems. The Council is therefore fully committed to using its powers under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to serve enforcement notices, where expedient, to allay breaches of planning control. Parallel powers to serve listed building enforcement notices regarding unauthorised works to listed buildings also exist by virtue of Section 9 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas ) Act 1990, and these too will be used to their full. In suitable cases the Council may also exercise the legal provision to seek a prosecution for unauthorised works to a listed building or the unauthorised demolition of an unlisted building.
Buildings in Disrepair
This is currently not a significant issue in the Conservation Area. However, there are numerous powers which the Council can and will use should any building fall into a state of disrepair serious enough for it to significantly adversely affect the character of the Conservation Area or to endanger the future of a listed building. These powers are:
- Urgent Works Notices (Sections 54 and 76 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Such notices can be served in respect of any vacant listed building or, with the prior approval of the Secretary of State, a vacant unlisted building whose preservation is considered important to the maintenance of the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Works specified can only be the minimum necessary to make the building wind and weathertight and are thus essentially temporary in nature. The owner must be given at least seven day’s notice, after which the Council may carry out the specified works and reclaim the costs from the owner.
- Listed Building Repairs Notices (Section 48 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. These can only be served in respect of listed buildings. Full and permanent repairs can be specified. If an owner fails to commence work on the specified works within 2 months of the service of a Repairs Notice, the Council may start compulsory purchase proceedings in relation to the building; no other recourse is made available by the legislation.
- “Untidy Site” Notices (Section 215 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990). Such a notice can be served in respect of any land (including a building) which the Council considers to adversely affect the amenity of the surroundings. The necessary steps to remedy the condition of the land and building need to be set out in the Notice and at least 28 days given for compliance. Failure to comply is deemed an offence and is punishable by a fine.
Trees
Trees can be important contributors to the character of the Conservation Area. All trees in a Conservation Area with a stem diameter generally above 75mm at 1.5 metres above ground level, are protected under Section 211 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Six week’s formal notice to the Council is required for any proposal to cut down or carry out work to such trees (a Section 211 Notice). Some trees are already protected by Tree Preservation Orders and the Council will consider the making of further orders where appropriate and expedient. If a tree is considered dead, dying or dangerous, the person proposing to remedy the problem is advised to give the Council 5 day’s prior notice to establish whether a notice or consent under Tree Preservation Order legislation is required.
New developments will be expected to retain existing trees of merit and, where appropriate, suitable new tree planting may be required as a condition of the grant of planning permission. A full planning permission which details works to protected trees overrides the requirement to give notice or obtain consent separately for such tree work.
However, anyone who otherwise carries out work to a tree in a Conservation Area without giving the necessary notice or obtaining the necessary consent where the tree is subject to a tree preservation order is likely to be guilty of an offence punishable by a fine. There may also be a requirement to plant a replacement tree of appropriate size and species at the same place as soon as it can be reasonably done. This duty may also apply where a tree has been removed because it was dead, dying or dangerous.
Shop Fronts and Signs
The Conservation Area Appraisal identifies where the facades of shops are deemed to be out of keeping with the character of the area. Maidstone Borough Council will conduct a survey of signs and shopfronts in order to take action against those which are unauthorised, and will re-survey the area on a regular basis in order to monitor further changes.
Reinstatement of Characteristic Features
As identified in the Appraisal, Holy Trinity Conservation Area has a number of features – such as railings, windows and doors – which provide the area’s unique character. Whenever possible, the Council will encourage the reinstatement of these important features to their original detail.
Hard Standing
The Appraisal indicates that the character of the Conservation Area has also been affected by the introduction of hard standing in front gardens. While the Article 4(2) Direction is used to control such development in new applications, the Council would also encourage the removal of existing hard standing to reinstate front gardens where appropriate.
Wirescape
The intrusive nature of overhead wiring and associated poles is also brought out in the Conservation Area Appraisal. The Council will therefore negotiate with the relevant statutory undertakers to seek improvements to or the removal of such wiring, subject to the identification of a suitable budget to carry out such works.
Road Signs, Lighting and Other Street Furniture
The choice of street furniture can also have a significant impact on the character of the Conservation Area. Where these have been deemed to be inappropriate, the Council will negotiate with the Highways Authority to seek improvements and the rationalisation of such features as road signs, bollards, and lighting to preserve the character of the area.
Car Parking and Vacant Sites
In this town centre location, a number of sites are currently used to accommodate car parking. As noted in the Appraisal, these sites have a negative impact on the historic character of the area. The Council will encourage the sensitive redevelopment of these sites, subject to adequate alternative parking provision being identified.
VII Review & Practice Procedures
The Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan will be reviewed after a period of five years and any appropriate amendments will be made to reflect changing circumstances.
A comprehensive photographic survey of the Conservation Area will be carried out every four years at least, in order to monitor changes and identify unauthorised works.
VIII Action Plan Summary
Measures to remedy breaches of planning or listed building control and the disrepair of buildings will be pursued in an ongoing fashion whenever appropriate. A summary of action to be taken on specific issues follows:-
|
Issue |
Action |
Responsibility |
Priority |
|
Suggested boundary extension |
Research and propose appropriate changes to the boundary for approval of Cabinet Member for Regeneration. Conduct public consultation. |
HLD Cabinet Member for Regeneration |
High |
|
Expansion of Article 4(2) into suggested extension |
Submit report for approval of Cabinet Member for Regeneration. Conduct public consultation. |
HLD Cabinet Member for Regeneration |
High |
|
Inappropriate shopfronts and signs |
Conduct survey and take action where possible and appropriate. |
HLD DC |
Medium |
|
Intrusive wirescape |
Identify problematic areas and liaise with public utilities to encourage more sensitive approaches. |
HLD Utilities |
Low |
|
Inappropriate road signs, lighting, and other street furniture |
Identify problematic areas and liaise with Kent County Council Highways to encourage more sensitive approaches. |
HLD Kent County Council Highways |
Medium |
|
Redevelopment of car parking and vacant sites |
Encourage sensitive approaches through development control process. |
HLD DC |
As opportunities allow |
Key:
DC = Development Control
HLD = Heritage, Landscape & Design Team