Contact your Parish Council

Background

At the meeting of the Committee on 14 March 2013, Members resolved to grant the Head of Planning delegated powers to grant planning permission for the above application subject to the expiry of the Departure Advertisement and the receipt of no representations raising new issues.

My previous report is appended.

The Departure Advertisement expired on 31 March 2013 and one further letter of representation has been received.

Representations 

The letter raises objections on two issues:

1: The loss of allotments. (This issue has previously been addressed).

2: The loss of the 28 garages and a potential resultant impact on parking in a village which has a parking problem and in a locality where a number of properties do not have off-street parking facilities and where on-street parking restrictions are in place. This has meant long-term parking in the Bell Lane Car Park thus reducing space for visitors. (This is an issue not previously raised).

Assessment

In respect of the loss of the garages, at the time the application was submitted, only 7 of the 28 garages were being rented out by the applicants.

Of these 7; inspections revealed that 4 were not being used for the parking of vehicles but most probably for long-term storage, with the remaining 3 appearing to be in current use for their intended purpose.  

The site access road also serves one further garage and two vehicular accesses relating to properties outside the application site.

The applicants also undertook a speed and classification survey along the access to the site at the time the application was submitted which included all vehicular movements relating to the 28 garages and the adjoining garage and two vehicular accesses. Over the survey period (7 days), there were a total of 45 car movements equating to just over 6 movements or 3 car journeys in and out of the site per day.

Members will note from the previous reports that Kent Highway Services have not objected to the loss of the garages.     

On the basis of the survey information and the situation as exists on the site, I do not consider that the loss of the garages would result in unacceptable increased demand for parking spaces elsewhere outside the site.

Conclusion 

I consider that having assessed the impact of the loss of the garages, the scheme remains acceptable. I also remain of the view that the provision of elderly persons’ affordable housing accommodation on this site is a balancing factor weighing in support of the proposals.  

I would request Members to reaffirm their previous decision to grant planning permission subject to conditions having considered the additional representations as set out and analysed above.

Recommendation

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the conditions and informatives previously agreed.