1. Home
  2. Council and Democracy
  3. Contact your Parish Council

Contact your Parish Council

Report - MA100748

APPLICATION:       MA/10/0748         Date: 5 May 2010 Received: 5 May 2010

 

APPLICANT:

Mr N Sanderson, Audley Mote Ltd

 

 

LOCATION:

MAIDSTONE CARE AT HOME SERVICE, MOTE HOUSE, MOTE PARK, MAIDSTONE, ME158NQ                                      

PARISH:

 

 

 

PROPOSAL:

Amendments to planning permission MA/06/0082 (Conversion of Mote House to an assisted living care home (Class C2) with associated accommodation (15 no. units) and facilities; conversion of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse and kitchens to form 14 no. residential units. Demolition of modern annexe and other modern buildings and replacement with new buildings to provide 24 no. residential units; conversion of existing potting sheds to 1 no. residential unit.  Construction of a new gatehouse building to provide 10 no. residential units; construction of 23 no. new residential units within the walled garden; associated landscaping works to all of these and formation of a new kitchen garden within the walled garden) being phase three class C2 ancillary accommodation variations including the conversion and extension of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse, dairy and old kitchens to form 15 no. accommodation units. Demolition of existing shed and ancillary buildings and replacement of new buildings to provide 21 no. accommodation units. Construction of 14 new accommodation units along the eastern boundary of site and rebuilding of carpenters shed to form 1 no. accommodation unit. Construction of 1 no. new detached accommodation unit adjacent to the carpenters shed. This representing an additional 14 units over and above the existing scheme as shown on drawing nos. 09043/EX(P3)/01, 02, 04-06, 10-16, 09043/LA/(P3)01revA, 09043/GA/P3/01-11, 09043/GA/(A1)/01/, 02, 03, 05, 06, 09043/GA/(A2)/01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 09043/GA/(A3)/01, 02, 04, 09043/GA/A4/01, 02, 04, 05, 09043/GA/A5/01, 02, 04, 05, T/09/776/SK02/P1, SK03/P1, SK04/P1, SK05/P1, SK06/P1 and Design and Access Statement and Tree survey received 05/05/2010 and as amended by drawing nos. 09043/GA(A2)01, 09043/GA(P3)11 and T/09/T16/ SK02 received 13/08/2010 and confidential finanacial information received 20/09/2010.

 

 

 

AGENDA DATE:

 

CASE OFFICER:

 

14th October 2010

 

Steve Clarke

 

The recommendation for this application is being reported to Committee for decision because:

●  The Council has a land ownership interest

 

      POLICIES

 

          Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000: ENV6, T13, CF1
          Government Policy: PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS9, PPS23, PPS25, PPG13

 
1.           HISTORY

 

1.1     Mote House has an extensive planning history. Prior to the current     refurbishment and redevelopment proposals it was used as Leonard Cheshire        Home for many years. Planning permission and listed building consent for the       current conversion, refurbishment and new-build works were granted in 2006      under the following applications.

         

·         MA/06/0082: Conversion of Mote House to an assisted living care home (Class C2) with associated accommodation (15 no. units) and facilities; conversion of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse and kitchens to form 14 no. residential units. Demolition of modern annexe and other modern buildings and replacement with new buildings to provide 24 no. residential units; conversion of existing potting sheds to 1 no. residential unit. Construction of a new gatehouse building to provide 10 no. residential units; construction of 23 no. new residential units within the walled garden; associated landscaping works to all of these and formation of a new kitchen garden within the walled garden: APPROVED 10/08/2006

 

·         MA/06/0081: An application for Listed Building consent for the conversion of Mote House to an assisted living care home (Class C2) with associated accommodation (15 no. units) and facilities.  Conversion of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse and kitchens to form 14 no. residential units; conversion of existing potting sheds to 1 no. new dwelling: demolition of modern annexe and other modern buildings and associated works: APPROVED 11/09/2006

 

 

 

 

         This application is accompanied by an application for Listed Building Consent which is also reported on this agenda.

 

         MA/10/0747: Amendments to listed building consent MA/06/0081 (an application for Listed Building consent for the conversion of Mote House to an assisted living care home (Class C2) with associated accommodation (15 no. units) and facilities.  Conversion of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse and kitchens to form 14 no. residential units; conversion of existing potting sheds to 1 no. new dwelling: demolition of modern annexe and other modern buildings and associated works) being phase three class C2 ancillary accommodation variations including the conversion and extension of existing stables, laundry/brewhouse, dairy and old kitchens to form 15 no. accommodation units. Demolition of existing shed and ancillary buildings and replacement of new buildings to provide 21 no. accommodation units. Construction of 14 new accommodation units along the eastern boundary of site and rebuilding of carpenters shed to form 1 no. accommodation unit. Construction of 1 no. new detached accommodation unit adjacent to the carpenters shed. This representing an additional 14 units over and above the existing scheme: UNDETERMINED ON THE PAPERS.

    

2.      CONSULTATIONS

 

2.1     Bearsted Parish Council: (An adjoining Parish):  No objections

 

2.2     English Heritage: Has commented as follows:-

‘This application proposes amendments to a scheme previously approved (MA/06/0081) for the conversion to assisted living residential units of the complex of predominantly early nineteenth-century service buildings to the north of the grade II* listed Mote House. The L-shaped stable range at the heart of this group is listed in its own right at grade II, but the complex as a whole should be treated as listed by virtue of being located within the curtilage of the main house.

 

Along with numerous more minor changes to the approved scheme, the amendments propose an additional fourteen residential units. As the original scheme was not considered to depart from the development plan or national planning policies, it was not treated as enabling development. Your Council will need to determine whether this amended scheme remains in accordance with these planning policies and, if not, it may be necessary to apply the policies on enabling development in PPS5 (HE11). I would be happy to provide further advice on these policies, if required.

 

Any additional harm to the setting of designated and undesignated heritage assets resulting from the supplementary units is in our view less than substantial because the extra units do not extend beyond the confines of the historic service complex. Policy HE9.4 of PPS5 is therefore applicable if this application is not to be treated as enabling development. English Heritage considers that the effect of the new scheme on the historic environment is still justified under the terms of HE9.4 on the basis of the public benefit of securing the optimum viable use of these heritage assets in the interests of their long-term conservation. We would therefore not object to listed building consent and planning permission being granted, subject to an additional condition being imposed requiring a method statement for the repair of the two internal gauged brick columns in the former dairy to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work on the dairy commences.

Recommendation

We urge you to address the above issues, and recommend that this application be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your expert conservation advice. It is not necessary for us to be consulted again. Please re-consult us if there are material changes to the proposals beyond those necessary to address the issues we have raised. We will then consider whether such changes might lead us to object. If they do, and if your authority is minded to grant consent, you should notify the Secretary of State of this application in accordance with Circular 08/2009.’

 

2.3    Natural England: Have advised that they have no comments to make, but          have stated that the application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The Council should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application.

 

2.4     Environment Agency: No objections, but have requested that a condition          requiring surface water drainage details to be submitted to alleviate potential   flood risk from surface water run-off is imposed.

 

2.5    Southern Water: Have confirmed that there is inadequate capacity to provide     foul sewage drainage for the development and have advised that additional       sewers are required. They have requested that conditions requiring details of     foul and surface water drainage are imposed on any permission and that the applicant should be advised to contact them to make a formal application for connection to the public sewer.

 

2.6     Kent Highway Services: No objections

 

2.7    West Kent PCT: Have requested a contribution of £7,056 towards the       provision of primary health care facilities. They have agreed with the applicants    that the assumed occupancy rate is 1.4 persons per unit and have applied a        requirement of £120/person for a three year period (£360) for the 14 additional         units within the application. They have confirmed that the contribution would contribute towards a premises upgrade/development to support Shepway Practice, Maidstone.  

 

2.8     EDF Energy: No objections

 

2.9    Southern Gas Networks: Have advised that there are existing low and medium-pressure gas mains in the vicinity of the site

 

2.10   MBC Conservation Officer: Has commented as follows:-

‘Whilst the level of new development previously permitted would be preferable in terms of the impact on the setting of the listed buildings, the current proposals have been the result of extensive pre-application consultation and have been amended in line with recommendations made by officers. If the additional accommodation is necessary in terms of the viability of the scheme as a whole I consider that this additional impact is justified. The minor changes to details of the conversion works are all acceptable in their latest form and the design of new build units is of an appropriate standard. Care has been taken to ensure that the developed area does not extend into the open surroundings and remains within the previously-developed farmyard limits.

 

Recommendation

It is, therefore, recommended that on heritage grounds NO OBJECTION IS RAISED subject to the following conditions.

Conditions to cover the following matters will be appropriate:-

·                      Programme of archaeological works to be agreed

·                      Samples of materials

·                      Sample panels of brickwork, stonework and re-pointing to be prepared and     approved.

·                      Joinery details.

·                      Metal window details.

·                      Metal balcony details.

·                      Submission and approval of a Schedule of Repairs for all existing structures to be      retained.

·                      Details of materials/ colours for all hardstandings, courtyards, pathways and   driveways.

·                      No dwelling units within the New Barn to be occupied prior to the completion of          restoration works to the Stables.

·                     No dwelling units within the blocks containing new apartments 13 -32 to be      occupied prior to the completion of restoration works to the Old Kitchens, Old       Dairy and Old Brewhouse.

·                     Landscaping details.

·                     Removal of PD Rights.’

 

2.11   MBC Environmental Health: Have no objections to the proposals but        have recommended that as a closure report is still awaited, the contaminated      land condition previously imposed should remain and not be discharged. 

 

3.      REPRESENTATIONS
 

3.1     None received

 

4.      CONSIDERATIONS

 

4.1     Site Description

 

4.1.1 The application site comprises the range of buildings to the north of Mote House including the Stables, the Old Kitchen/ Dairy, the Brewhouse and Laundry and former racquets court and potting sheds. Mote House and the area immediately to the east and the Walled Garden some 350m to the east of the main house and an area of existing woodland in between, known as the Pleasure Grounds also form part of the site leased from the Council and managed and under development by the applicants.

 

4.1.2 Mote Park, within which the development site sits, is on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens of England and listed as Grade II. The site sits in a landscaped setting with woodland and parkland trees and Mote House looks out over a large-man–made lake.

 

4.1.3 Mote House and the land and buildings subject to this application are located towards the eastern side of the Park away from Maidstone Town Centre.  

 

4.1.4 Vehicular access to the site is from Willington Street located to the east of the site.  

 

4.1.5 Mote House is a Grade II* Listed building and was built for the Earl of Romney between 1793 and 1801, the architect was Daniel Asher Alexander who also designed Maidstone and Dartmoor Prisons as well as a number of Lighthouses for Trinity House and London Docks. Alexander was a pupil of Sir John Soanes, the architect of the Bank of England who was a proto-modernist and gave rise to a school of architecture known as ‘Soansian’, a key feature being the design of spaces.

 

4.1.6 In addition to Mote House, the Stables (Grade II) and The Old Brewhouse (Grade II) are also individually listed. The Brewhouse actually pre-dates Mote House, being erected in the 15th or 16th Centuries and is an example of a Wealden Hall House. The other buildings pre-dating 1948 within the site are also listed by virtue of being within the curtilage of the listed building.

 

4.1.7 Mote Park and the application site are located within the Urban Area of Maidstone as defined in the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000.

 

4.2    Proposal

 

4.2.1 The proposals include the conversion and/or rebuilding of the existing stables,  Brewhouse and Old kitchens/dairy to form a total of 15 apartments, the demolition of existing sheds and ancillary buildings and their replacement with new buildings to provide 21 no. accommodation units, the construction of 14 new accommodation units along the eastern boundary of site, together with the rebuilding of the carpenters shed to form 1 no. accommodation unit and the construction of 1 no. new detached accommodation unit adjacent to the carpenters shed. This represents an additional 14 units over and above the existing approved scheme. The application relates to Phase 3 of the previously approved development at and adjoining Mote House, with phases 1 and 2 underway and substantially completed. The scheme was discussed informally prior to its submission with both Officers and Members. The justification was stated to be that additional units were required to render the scheme more viable given the current financial climate.

 

4.2.2 The breakdown of accommodation in this area of the site as previously approved is as follows;

·      The Stables: Conversion and refurbishment: 8 units

·      The Old Brewhouse and Laundry: Conversion and refurbishment: 4 units

·      The Old Dairy: Re-building and conversion: 1 unit

·      The Old Kitchens: Re-building and conversion: two-storey health suite and swimming pool 

·      Existing Potting/Carpenters shed: Conversion 1 unit

·      New Barn Building (north side of stable courtyard) 3 Units new-build on the site of existing modern barn to be demolished.

·      ‘Glasshouse Court’: 6 single-storey units new-build on the site of existing potting sheds

·      ‘Racquets House’: 8 apartments new-build on the site of the old racquets court

·      Three pairs of two-storey units (south of Racquets House and north of The Old Dairy: 6 units new-build

·      New single residential unit south of the Potting/carpenters shed

 

This would have resulted in the provision of 38 units.

 

4.2.3 The current application proposes the following changes to the previously approved schedule.    

·                The Stables: Conversion and refurbishment:  Now 5 units

·      The Old Kitchens: Re-building and conversion: Now 2 units and treatment rooms below

·      Existing Potting/Carpenters shed: Conversion 1 unit: It is no longer proposed to re-site and re-build part of the western flank wall of this building to enlarge the building.

·      Site of previously approved ‘Glasshouse Court’ and ‘Racquets House’: 21 units in new-build two storey blocks

·      Eastern site boundary (replacing previously approved semi-detached units) 14 new-build units comprising one block of 8 units, one block of 4 units and one pair of units.

 

The changes result in the provision of 52 units an increase of 14.

 

4.2.4 The 3 units on the site of the modern barn would be constructed from a reconstituted rubble stone facing with the first floor in red bricks to match the stables under a natural slate roof. They will be linked to the stables by a smaller building using the same materials.

 

4.2.5 With regard to The Old Kitchens/Dairy, the applicants propose to rebuild the old kitchen in its original form including a shorter version of the original chimney. The ground floor accommodation is now to be converted to apartments. The applicants have un-earthed two previously unknown vaults below the old kitchens. One an ice house is located below the dairy, and a second for hanging carcasses, below the old kitchens. The discovery of these vaults lead to the swimming pool being relocated to a site just north of Mote House to enable the vaults to be retained.

 

4.2.6 The new apartments in the stable yard area have been designed to be complimentary to the stables and echo the feel of former farm buildings. They are designed to create a series of yard spaces, utilizing local vernacular forms and matching traditional local building materials. The new buildings will be partly built from buff brick as used on the new Gatehouse Lodge to the east of Mote House with natural slate roofs or they will have red brick plinths with black-stained weatherboarding above under plain clay tiled roofs. One section of the proposed building that faces the stables along the access road will incorporate an existing stone wall to first floor level. A further section on the west elevation of the new building on the site of the previously approved Racquets House will incorporate an existing stone wall as a plinth.  

 

4.2.7 The development as now proposed will result in a series of formal courtyards, largely hard landscaped, between the buildings which will provide space for the parking provision and also allow for circulation between the buildings. Areas of greenery will be located close to the buildings and some of the units will have external patio areas facing into the courtyard areas. Trees will also be planted in the courtyard areas.  

 

4.2.8 In terms of the parking proposed, 52 car parking spaces are shown to be provided at a ratio of one per unit, of which 10 will be for disabled access use. This compares with the previously approved 40 spaces. A total of 13 cycle spaces are also proposed.

 

4.2.9 The applicants have agreed Heads of Terms for a contribution to West Kent PCT towards the provision of primary health care facilities. This involves a payment of £7,056 to West Kent PCT which they have indicated would be spent towards a premises upgrade/development at the Shepway Practice located in Northumberland Road.

 

4.3    Principle of Development

 

4.3.1 The principle of the conversion, re-building/refurbishment and erection of newly built development on this part of the site has been accepted under the previous partially implemented permission and because it is within the developed footprint of the former estate buildings and is ‘brownfield.’ There have been no significant changes in the material circumstances of the site since the previous planning permission and listed building consents were granted.

 

4.3.2 It is not considered that the development should be considered as enabling development as defined in Policy HE11 of PPS5. The development is taking place in a defined urban area and involves previously developed land which as set out above already has planning permission. It is not therefore a departure from the Development Plan. The original proposals were not considered to be a form of enabling development. 

 

4.3.3 The applicant has however advised that this additional development is necessary to underpin the viability of the scheme as a whole. A brief financial statement has been submitted as part of the application. This is attached as an Exempt Appendix.  

 

4.3.4 In principle therefore, no objections are raised to the proposed revisions to previously approved development. The development must however, be acceptable in all other respects.

 

4.4    Design and impact on Listed Buildings

 

4.4.1 This is the key determining issue in relation to this application. The details of the previously approved design have been retained in respect of the stable block and the other existing buildings to be converted or rebuilt/refurbished.  For example, the external stonework of the stables will be repaired, the stable clock restored and the existing stalls within the stable building, which are remarkably intact, will be retained and used as storage space by the residents.

 

4.4.2 However, given the constraints of the stable block building in the vicinity of the entrance archway that were identified during investigative works that were undertaken since the original planning permission and listed building consents were granted, only five units are now proposed enabling the retention of an even greater proportion of the original character of the building.  

 

4.4.3 Similarly in respect of the Old Kitchens and Dairy, the discovery of the underground vaults has necessitated a re-consideration of the uses and configuration of this building. The vaults are to be retained an existing large hearth is also to be retained as feature. The ground floor is now to be used as residential accommodation and the lower floors as reception areas. To ensure retention of the vaults the previously proposed swimming pool that was to be located in the basement of the Old Kitchens has been relocated to an area just north of Mote House. This obtained planning permission earlier this year.       

 

4.4.4 The works to the retained buildings remain appropriate in scale, design, materials and detailing, subject to precise details of such matters as external materials including e.g. the provision on site of sample panels of brickwork, stonework and re-pointing, joinery and a precise schedule of repairs being secured by condition.

 

4.4.5 The design of the new units within the stable yard adjacent to the carpenters’/potting shed and just to the north of The Old Dairy remain largely as previously approved in the original applications and remain acceptable. These reflect the style of the various lodges around the park and the detailing of the stables. They are not intended to compete with the main Mote House. They use stonework and eaves and roof detailing similar to the lodges and stables.

 

4.4.6 The greatest change relates to the proposed buildings on the northern and eastern side of the complex. These proposed buildings are now two-storey and comprise a greater footprint than those originally approved. However, they do not extend beyond the original confines of the estate service buildings.

 

4.4.7 The external envelopes of these buildings have also changed. These have now been conceived as complimentary to the stables and echo the style of former farm buildings. They are designed to create a series of yard spaces, utilizing local vernacular forms and matching traditional local building materials, primarily through the use of brick or ragstone plinths and horizontal dark-stained boarding. Their relationship continues the series of small courtyards and spaces around the buildings which is characteristic of this part of the estate service complex.

 

4.4.8 The proposed elements of new development have been carefully considered in relation to their impact on the character of the park and existing heritage assets within and adjoining the site. The new–build works are considered to be of an appropriate scale and form. The palette of materials proposed incorporates local building materials, examples of which are found as close nearby as a group of former agricultural buildings in Willington Street located close to its junction with School Lane. Precise detailing and materials can be secured through the use of suitable conditions. It is not considered that the development would result in harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area arising from its scale and design.           

 

4.4.9 The stable yard was always screened from the main house and the rest of the

                   park by the yew trees that are still present. These will be retained, although they will be pruned to allow some light down to the ground and improve the shape of the trees. Elsewhere in the stable yard landscaping will be low key, emphasising the retained stone walls and existing buildings.

 

4.4.10         The new accommodation units will not have private gardens as the intention is to preserve the farm-yard atmosphere that is so much a part of the character of this group of buildings. Each unit maintains an intimate relationship with the courtyard/space in which it is located. The spaces around are also largely hard-surfaced to continue the theme of a converted agricultural building complex. Some landscaping and trees are however shown. 

 

4.4.11 The indicated detailing of these new apartment buildings and the indicated use of materials is considered to be acceptable. These can be subject to appropriate safeguarding conditions. Precise details of the surface treatment of the courtyard spaces and hard surfaced areas within the site can also be subject to an appropriate condition.

 

4.4.12 English Heritage and the Conservation Officer consider that the proposals would cause less than substantial harm to the setting of designated and undesignated heritage assets. They are content that no harm arises as the development is restricted to and does not extend beyond the confines of the historic service complex, which is bounded by a series of boundary enclosures and walls which are shown to retained.

 

4.4.13 Policy HE9.4 of PPS5 is applicable as the development is not considered to be      enabling development because the site is previously developed land within a   defined urban area and its development is not contrary to national or local plan       policy. Policy HE9.4 of PPS5 states:-

 

‘HE9.4 Where a proposal has a harmful impact on the significance of a designated heritage asset which is less than substantial harm, in all cases local planning authorities should:

(i) weigh the public benefit of the proposal (for example, that it helps to secure

the optimum viable use of the heritage asset in the interests of its long-term conservation) against the harm; and

(ii) recognise that the greater the harm to the significance of the heritage asset the greater the justification will be needed for any loss.’

 

4.4.14 Mote House and the associated service complex of buildings are an important

           heritage asset. The proposed additional development and works now proposed

           will secure the optimum viable use of these buildings and ensure their long-

           term conservation.

 

4.4.15 Whilst clearly more units are to be located in this part of the site than previously proposed and approved, I do not consider that the new-build development will result in harm to the character and appearance of the historic park or the listed buildings. The essential character of this part of the site as a complex of estate service and farm buildings subservient to the main Mote Park House is retained. Built development will not extend beyond the existing footprint of development in to the historic park beyond.

 

4.4.16 Subject to appropriate safeguarding conditions I consider that the impact of the development and the proposed design of the various elements on the listed buildings and the historic park as heritage assets is acceptable. This view is shared by the both the Conservation Officer and English Heritage. 

 

4.5    Residential Amenity

 

4.5.1 There are two existing tied-cottages in the ownership of the Council located approximately 11m to the north of the proposed new-build two-storey apartments. I do not consider that the development will result in an unacceptable level of amenity for the occupiers of these properties. The proposed buildings come no closer to the flank boundary of the cottages than the previously approved scheme.

 

4.5.2 There is also an acceptable level of amenity within the proposed development. The proposed courtyard layout is intentionally open with no totally private amenity areas to maintain the feel of the converted farmstead that is sought in the design and layout.   

 

4.6    Highways

 

4.6.1  There are no adverse highway implications arising from the current proposals        and Kent Highway Services have raised no objections to the development.

 

4.7    S106 Obligations

 

4.7.1 West Kent Primary Care Trust have requested a contribution of £7,056 towards the provision of primary health care facilities to meet the additional demand placed on the provision of medical services by the development. They have agreed with the applicants that the assumed occupancy rate is 1.4 persons per unit and have applied a requirement of £120/person for a three year period (£360) for the 14 additional units within the application. The PCT have confirmed that the contribution would be used for a premises upgrade/development to support the Shepway Practice in Northumberland Road.  

 

4.7.2  The Heads of Terms for the s106 obligations have been considered against the statutory tests as set out within Regulation 122 of the Act. This sets out that any obligation should be;

 

(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

(b) directly related to the development; and

(c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The contribution is related to the development, and fair and reasonable in terms of the scale of the requirements to the development.  I consider that the provision of the contribution would ensure that the development would provide a suitable level of funding to ensure that any additional strain placed upon the existing health care services and infrastructure within the locality, (the contribution would be used for the upgrading/development at the Shepway Practice), is addressed and is therefore necessary. I therefore consider that the proposal complies with Policy CF1 of the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan (2000). 

 

5       CONCLUSION

 

5.1    I consider the proposed alterations to the Listed Buildings to be acceptable,           subject to appropriate safeguarding conditions. The proposed works to convert and refurbish the buildings and bring them into a beneficial use will ensure the long term retention of these heritage assets preserving the setting of Mote House and also the Historic Park beyond.

 

5.2    I also consider the increased number of units to be acceptable along with the indicated design and site planning approach to the development

 
6        RECOMMENDATION

 

SUBJECT TO:

 

A: The prior completion of a s106 legal agreement, to secure;

  • The payment of a contribution of £7,056 to the West Kent Primary Care Trust for the provision of additional primary healthcare facilities to meet the needs generated by the development to be spent on a premises upgrade/development to support the Shepway Practice at Northumberland Road.

 

The HEAD of DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT BE GIVEN DELEGATED POWER TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:  

 

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

Reason: In accordance with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.   The development shall not commence until, written details and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building(s) hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be constructed using the approved materials;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development pursuant to the advice in PPS1 and PPS5.

3.   The development shall not commence until, full details of the following matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

 a) New internal joinery in the form of large scale drawings.
 b) New external joinery in the form of large scale drawings.
 c) Details of metal windows in the form of large scale drawings.
 d) Details of metal balconies in the form of large scale drawings. 

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;

Reason: To ensure the appearance and the character of the buildings are maintained pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

4.   The development shall not commence until, details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the first occupation of the buildings or land;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development pursuant to the advice in PPS1 and PPS5

5.   The development shall not commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, using indigenous species which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development and a programme for the approved scheme's implementation and long term management. The scheme shall be designed using the principles established in the Council's adopted Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Guidelines;

Reason: No such details have been submitted and to ensure a satisfactory visual appearance pursuant to policy ENV6 of the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000.

6.   All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development pursuant to policy ENV6 of the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000.

7.   All trees to be retained must be protected by barriers and/or ground protection in accordance with BS 5837 (2005) 'Trees in Relation to Construction-Recommendations'. The tree protection measures and fencing shown in the Quaife Woodlands Report received 05/05/2010 shall be erected prior to any equipment, machinery or materials being brought onto the site and shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed, nor fires lit, within any of the areas protected in accordance with this condition. The siting of barriers/ground protection shall not be altered, nor ground levels changed, nor excavations made within these areas without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority;

Reason: To safeguard existing trees to be retained and to ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development pursuant to policy ENV6 of the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000.

8.   The approved details of the parking/turning areas shall be completed before the commencement of the use of the land or buildings hereby permitted and shall thereafter be kept available for such use. No development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2008 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 (or any order revoking and re- enacting that Order, with or without modification) or not, shall be carried out on the areas indicated or in such a position as to preclude vehicular access to them;

Reason: Development without adequate parking/turning provision is likely to lead to parking inconvenient to other road users and in the interests of road safety pursuant to policy T13 of the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000.

9.   Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2008 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008  (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no development within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C, D, E, F, G & H and Part 2 Class A  to that Order shall be carried out without the permission of the Local Planning Authority;
    
Reason: To safeguard the character, appearance and functioning of the surrounding area and the listed buildings pursuant to the advice in PPS1 and PPS5.

10.         The development shall not commence until the applicant has secured and had implemented a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written specification and timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority;

Reason: To enable the recording of any items of historical or archaeological interest pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

11.         The development shall not commence until, a schedule of repairs for all existing structures to be retained has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure the appearance and character of the listed buildings is preserved pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

12.         The details of materials submitted pursuant to condition 2 above shall include details of the surface treatment, materials and colours of all hardstandings, courtyards, pathways driveways and access ways within the site. The development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the subsequently approved details except as agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason; To ensure the appearance and character of the buildings is maintained pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

13.         No dwelling units within the New Barn permitted under application MA/10/0748 shall be occupied until such time as the restoration works to the Stables have been completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and that such approval has been given in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure the appearance and character of the listed buildings is preserved pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

14.         No dwelling units within the blocks containing new apartments 13-32 permitted under application MA/10/0748 shall be occupied until such time as the restoration works to the Old Kitchens, the Old Dairy and the Old Brewhouse and laundry have been completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and that such approval has been given in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure the appearance and character of the listed buildings is preserved pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

15.        The development shall not commence until sample panels of brickwork, stonework and re-pointing have been provided on site and approved by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the subsequently approved details and the approved panels shall be retained on site as a reference until such time as works are completed. 

Reason: To ensure the appearance and character of the listed buildings is preserved pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

16.        The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:
 09043/EX(P3)/01, 02, 04-06, 10-16, 09043/LA/(P3)01revA, 09043/GA/P3/01-11, 09043/GA/(A1)/01/, 02, 03, 05, 06, 09043/GA/(A2)/01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 09043/GA/(A3)/01, 02, 04, 09043/GA/A4/01, 02, 04, 05, 09043/GA/A5/01, 02, 04, 05, T/09/776/SK2/P1, SKo3/P1, SK04/P1, SK05/P1, SK06/P1, 09043/GA(A2)01, 09043/GA(P3)11 and T/09/T16/ SK02;

Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is maintained and to preserve the character and appearance of the listed buildings pursuant to the advice in PPS5.

The proposed development, subject to the conditions stated,  is considered to comply with the policies of the Development Plan (Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000) and there are no overriding material considerations to indicate a refusal of planning consent.