Contact your Parish Council

APPLICATION:       MA/13/0201            Date: 5 February 2013 Received: 26 February 2013

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

    ●    The Council is the applicant.

1.           POLICIES

Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000:  ENV7.

Government Policy:  National Planning Policy Framework (2012).

2.           HISTORY

2.1     There is extensive history for the site.  The most relevant to this proposal is:

          MA/13/0055         An application for listed building consent for installation of wrought iron gates to central tower – This was reported to Planning Committee on 21^st February 2013 and Members resolved to report the application to the Secretary of State, recommending that Listed Building Consent be granted. Consent has now been granted, subject to the conditions set out in the Committee report.

3.            CONSULTATIONS

3.1     English Heritage: No response.

3.2        Conservation Officer: No objections. Comments from the Listed Building Consent application stated:

“The projecting central entrance porch structure to the Archbishops’ Palace has archways on each of its three exposed sides. One of these already has gates fitted, but those to the sides do not. There is a current problem of rough sleeping and associated anti-social behaviour under the porch, so it is proposed to erect matching gates to the two side arches. These will have no adverse impact on the significance of the Grade I Listed Building”.

4.           REPRESENTATIONS

4.1     None received to date.

5.           CONSIDERATIONS

5.1    Site Description

5.1.1  This application relates to the Grade I Listed Archbishop’s Palace, a key building of historical importance close to Maidstone town centre.  It dates from the medieval period and is constructed mainly of ashlar, under a tiled roof.  The site lies within All Saints Church Maidstone Conservation Area and the Riverside Zone of Special Townscape Importance.

5.2    Proposal

5.2.1  Planning Permission is sought for the installation of wrought iron gates to the sides of the central tower, which is a key feature of the front elevation of the building.  The central tower currently has an archway with a wrought iron gate to the front elevation, but the archways to the sides of the tower are currently open.  It is proposed to install gates of matching design to both sides, to provide greater security and address anti-social behaviour issues. The gates would be approximately 2m high.

5.3    Impact upon the Listed Building and its setting

5.3.1  The proposed gates would be of a sympathetic design to the Listed Building and would be in keeping with the existing gate to the front elevation of the tower.  The existing gate is clearly a non-original addition to the tower and the proposed gates would follow this example.  The openwork nature of the gates would allow the original form of the medieval tower, with its important archways, to be easily read.  The use of wrought iron is an appropriate, traditional material. No important historic fabric would be lost.

5.3.2  I note that the Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposal. 

5.3.3  The eradication of anti-social behaviour issues would also aid the viability of the building as a wedding venue, which would have a positive impact upon the Listed Building.

5.4    Visual Impact upon the Conservation Area

5.4.1  The proposed gates are of a suitable siting, quality and design to preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the visual quality of the Riverside Zone of Special Townscape Importance. They would not cause significant harm to any key views of the Conservation Area or to the river corridor.

5.5    Other Matters

5.5.1  The proposal is of a type which would have no significant adverse effect upon archaeology.

5.5.2  There are no significant residential amenity or ecological issues, due to the type of proposal and siting.

6.           CONCLUSION

6.1     The proposal would preserve the character, appearance and historical integrity of the Listed Building and its setting, and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

 6.2    Subject to no significant new issues being raised as a result of outstanding statutory consultation, it is recommended that Planning Permission be granted, subject to conditions as listed below.

7.           RECOMMENDATION

Subject to no significant new issues being raised as a result of outstanding statutory consultation I BE 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 hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:
drawing no.s 1C/100 received on 26/02/13, , 1C/100 and 1B/100 received on 12/02/13 and a Design & Access Statement received on 13/02/13 .
Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is maintained and to preserve the historical integrity of the Grade I Listed Building in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.           The development shall not commence until full details of the proposed gates, in the form of large scale drawings, (at a scale of 1:10), including details of the precise positioning and fixings of the gates, 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.
Reason: To preserve the setting, character and appearance of the Grade I Listed building, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

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 the South East Plan 2009) and there are no overriding material considerations to indicate a refusal of planning consent.