Contact your Parish Council

08-2270_report

APPLICATION: �� MA/08/2270�� Date: 14 November 2008�� Received: 23 January 2009

APPLICANT:	Mr David Pownceby, Lilybrook Developments Ltd

LOCATION:	LAND AT 5, 6 & 8, WILSON CLOSE, MAIDSTONE, KENT, ME15 8AP

PROPOSAL:	Erection of 14no. dwellings together with access and on street parking in accordance with plans numbered PL-100; SC400; PL-110; PS-120; PS-100; PS-130; PL-370; PL-351; PL-350; PL-360; PL-361; PL-100; PS-110; EL-170; EL-161; EL-151; EL-160; EL-150; PL-120 and the transport assessment, ecological assessment; design and access statement and planning statement received on the 17 November 2008; together with the tree survey received on the 23 January 2009.
AGENDA DATE: CASE OFFICER:	3rd September 2009 Chris Hawkins

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

●� Councillor Bob Hinder has requested it be reported for the reason set out in the report

POLICIES

Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000: ENV6, T13, CF1
South East Plan 2009: CC1, CC4, H2, H3, H4, H5, T4, M1, BE1, AOSR7
Village Design Statement:� N/A

Government Policy:� PPS1, PPS3, PPS9, PPG13, PPS25

HISTORY

MA/07/2013 -�� Land rear of 5 Garden Close, plots 5, 6 8 Wilson Close, Maidstone, Kent.� Outline application for the erection of thirty nine residential units with layout, scale and access to be considered at this stage and all other matters reserved for future consideration. Withdrawn.

The application above was withdrawn as it was considered that there would have been insufficient information to determine an application of this type, i.e. a development of this scale, within such proximity to a number of trees and residential dwellings. Subsequent pre-application discussions took place prior to the submission of this application.

There is no other planning history relevant to this site.

CONSULTATIONS

Maidstone Borough Council Environmental Services were consulted and raised no objections to this proposal on the basis that there would be no noise, contamination or amenity concerns that this development was raise. Informatives have been suggested which are set out at the rear of the report, concerning the construction of the development, should permission be granted.��

Maidstone Borough Council Parks and Open Space Officer was consulted and has objected to this proposal for the following reasons:

�The development proposes to remove existing trees and this is unacceptable in an area adjacent and connected to an important UK habitat and green corridor. Senacre Woods is also applying for �Local Wildlife Site� Status � this status holds a greater degree of protection even than a Local Nature Reserve status and indicates the fragile state of this area, not always immediately visibly obvious.

There continue to be (and have historically been) flood drainage issues through Senacre Woods; the hard roof surfaces and hardstanding created by this development would exacerbate existing difficulties. In turn, if permitted, extra pressure on the flora and fauna within the wood environment would be exerted.�

However, it was stated that should Members be minded to grant planning permission, then contributions of �1575 per unit should be provided within the Heads of Terms.

*Officer Comment: The matter of the ecological impact of this proposal is addressed within the main body of the report.�

Maidstone Borough Council Landscape Officer was consulted and made the following comments on this application: -

The proposed dwellings are located next to Senacre Woodland which is classed as semi and ancient woodland consisting of ash coppice. The land in question slopes down towards the woods.�

A tree survey was carried out to assess the quality of the trees within the site. The survey was carried out in accordance with BS:2005 Trees in Relation to Construction - Recommendations.� Referring to the drawing-BLC090104, it would appear that there are 18 (T6- T21) trees within the rear gardens however they are outside the development site. These trees have been classed as either low category (trees in groups/ woodlands/ trees offering low or only temporary screening benefit). In addition it is noted that 5 trees (T14,15,18,19,21) should be felled because they were considered to be structurally unsound. The root protection area (RPA) has been calculated and it is evident from the drawing that they will not be affected by the development. The RPA for T8 encroaches onto the development however only by a minimal amount and will not have a detrimental effect on the T8.

Constraints from Trees

There are a number of trees within the garden which to be removed to facilitate the development however no dimensions have been provided. The only notable tree which has been classed as moderate is T1 which is situated to the south of No 8. The RPA is shown to encroach into the development and therefore it will be necessary that adequate fencing is erected before any works commence.

Along the northern and south side of the area there are a number trees not within the boundary where only the canopies have been surveyed but no measurements are given. Drawing PL-120 indicates that the trees on the south side will overhang the rear garden of the new dwelling. Such close proximity to the garden may present a future conflict in that sunlight will be restricted. However as the trees are not protected it will be a matter for the owners of the two properties to agree any works. There may be additional pressure to carry out coppicing works within Senacre woodland because of the orientation of the balconies which are facing east.

Soil Levels:

The gardens slope toward the Senacre Woodland, however it should be noted that any changes in ground level will have an impact on any retained trees. Drawing EL-151 shows the side elevation.�

It was therefore concluded that this application should be approved on arboricultural grounds subject to the imposition of the conditions as set out at the rear of the report.

NHS West Kent PCT were consulted and raised no objection to the proposal subject to the provision of a commuted sum to address the further burden upon the areas health care services. The obligation would be for a total of �17,640 (plus any additional legal fees in connection with the S106).

Kent County Council Highway Services were consulted and raised concerns about the level of parking provision within the development. The proposal incorporates one car parking space per unit, which is considered to be insufficient within a development of 4/5bedroom homes.

Officer Comment: Clearly the provision of one space per unit is under the maximum standard set out by KCC Highways. However, in refusing any application for the lack of parking provision, we have to be content that this lack would give rise to highway safety issues. It is considered that in this instance, as the development would not be upon a through road, and there would be room upon the proposed street for additional on-street parking, it would be unlikely that traffic would then spill onto Freeman�s Way and give rise to highway safety issues. This matter is further considered within the main body of the report.�

Kent County Council (Mouchel) were consulted and raised no objection to the proposal subject to the provision of a commuted sum to address additional demands placed upon libraries, adult education, youth and community, and adult social services, by this development. They have requested that the following sums be provided (per dwelling) - �227 (libraries), �180 (adult education), �827 (Youth and Community) and �1201 (adult social services).�

Kent Wildlife Trust were consulted and wished to register a holding objection to the proposal, on the basis that an intensification of the site would give the following additional pressures upon the nearby woodland:

A greater number of residents in close proximity to the woodland;
A greater number of private garden areas abutting the woodland, increasing the risk of the disposal of garden waste onto the woodland;
A greater number of predatory domestic animals living within close proximity to the woodland;
A greater level of external illumination along the woodland margin;
More intense surface water run-off flows entering the woodland from the site.

However, the Trust does agree that if specific conditions are imposed, this objection would be withdrawn. These conditions concern the following matters: -

Retention of trees and scrub along the eastern boundary;
Any new planting to comprise native species of local provenance;
No net increase in the levels of lighting cast on the woodland;
Retention and enhancement (with native scrub planting, log piles and cat proof fencing) of existing buffer zone along eastern boundaries;
Installation of 5 bat boxes and provision of bat access into non-domestic buildings;
Mitigation measures during construction process;
Placement of 5 bird boxes;
Removal of garden waste from the buffer zone;
Installation of site fencing to deter contractors from storing waste materials within the buffer zone;
Installation of flow regulators and fuel interceptors in the surface water drainage system to prevent excess and polluted discharge into the ancient woodland.��

Natural England were notified and raised no objection to this proposal.

Southern Water were consulted and raised no objections to the proposal subject to the imposition of suitable safeguarding conditions, as set out at the end of this report.

EDF Energy were consulted and raised no objections to the proposal.

The Environment Agency were consulted and raised no objections to this proposal.

REPRESENTATIONS

Councillor Bob Hinder has requested that this application be brought to Planning Committee for the following reasons:

The size of the proposed development;
The proposal is against the wishes of the local residents;
The existing sewer is too small to take any additional load;
The developer has overlooked a number of the trees within the site;
The proposal would be out of keeping with the surrounding development � the area is characterised by bungalows;
The area is not suitable for such large properties.

Should the application be recommended for approval, Cllr Hinder has suggested that consideration be given to imposing the following conditions:

Hours of work to be strictly controlled;
Hours of delivery to the site should be strictly controlled.

Neighbouring properties were notified and to-date 22 letters of objection have been received. The main concerns of these letters are:-

The lack of parking provision within the application site;
The proposal would see too many houses erected, to the detriment of the landscape;
The proposed development would have a detrimental impact upon the existing sewer system;
Potential flood risk;
The impact upon the existing highways by virtue of additional vehicle movements;
The proposed development does not �fit in� with the surrounding area;
The proposal would be too dense � cramming;
The properties would be at risk to subsidence;
Impact upon the existing roads by virtue of the construction traffic.

CONSIDERATIONS

Site Description

The application site lies to the rear of properties within Wilson Close, between these properties and a public amenity space (Senacre Woods). The properties within Wilson Close are all bungalows, with the properties beyond these within Freeman Way, two-storey (predominantly semi-detached) properties. The site lies within the urban confines of Maidstone, upon land with no specific designation within the Local Plan.

To the rear of the site (to the east) is an historic woodland area, which is set aside for community use. There are paths through this woodland, with a small stream running through the centre (although at the time of my visit this was dry). This woodland area is at the bottom of a very sharp valley, with trees within the basin, and also upon the slopes. These are clearly very well established, and of some age.

The land within the application site also slopes significantly, from west to east, with a drop of some 11.5metres. The land level falls even more sharply to the east, as you enter into the wooded area. There are no trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders within the application site or the adjacent woodland.��

The overall site area for this proposal is 0.45 hectares, with a further area set aside within the �blue line� which does not form part of this application site. This land is proposed to be retained as existing woodland. The application site is fairly regular in shape, albeit for a small area to the west, which effectively �bites� into this site.�

Proposal

The proposal is a full application seeking permission for the erection of 14 dwellings, which consist of six pairs of semi-detached properties, and two detached properties. The proposal consists of a cul-de-sac, which would have the semi-detached properties sited upon its north-eastern side, with the detached dwellings located upon the western side (two semi-detached properties are also proposed within the south-western corner of the site). This development would provide a density of 31 units per hectare, which is in line with the guidance set out within PPS3. The proposal would see the loss of the three bungalows currently sited at the end of Wilson Close. These properties are of no significant merit, and their loss is not considered a concern.�

The semi-detached properties along the north-eastern side of the site would be uniform in appearance, and would have a width of 5.4metres, a depth of 11metres, and a maximum height of 10metres (to the front) and a maximum height of 13metres to the rear. These variations in height are brought about by the topography of the site, and the significant changes in levels from front to rear. These semi-detached properties would appear as two storey (with rooms within the roofs) facing into to the site, and would appear as three storey (with rooms within the roofs) to the rear. The properties would have a relatively contemporary appearance with the use of render and timber cladding on the elevations, and also incorporating features such as large overhanging eaves, and first floor projections. The rooms within the roofs are set within the roofslope, and as such would not appear as dormer windows � and as such, there would be a small balcony area to the front of these windows. To the rear these properties would incorporate a large amount of glazing, which would enable the occupiers to take advantage of the views over the historic woodland beyond.

It is proposed that these properties have a large amount of decking to the rear (which would project between three and four metres from the rear elevation). The rear gardens of these properties would have depths of between 10metres and 16metres. In addition, all of these properties would have a sufficient space to the front to provide soft landscaping (some properties would be set back some 12metres from the road.

The semi-detached properties within the south-west corner of the site, would be very similar to those described above, however, due to the topography of the site at this point, there would be no difference in the height from the front to the rear of these properties. As such, the maximum height of these properties would be 10metres to ridge. The detailing to the front however, appears similar to other properties within the site.

The detached properties (plots 13 and 14) would be located on the western side of the access road. These properties would have a maximum width of 13metres, a depth of 6metres and a height to ridge of 9.1metres. These would be two storey properties, again, with rooms within the roof (although these rooms would be served with velux windows.

These properties would have a rear garden depth of between 12 and 15 metres, and would be set back from the access road by approximately 2metres. These properties again would address the topography of the site, with the properties set at a lower level than the rear gardens (at approx 3metres lower than the garden).

The access into the site would be served from the end of Wilson Close, which would retain its existing �hammerhead� turning area. It is proposed that this access be constructed up to an adoptable standard, up to the point when only five houses are served. At this point, the development will incorporate block pavers. It is proposed that 1 parking space per unit be provided within the application site.

Whilst at present much of rear gardens of the existing properties incorporate the wooded area to the rear, it is proposed that the rear boundaries of these properties end before this point, with the remaining area left as it is at present. There will therefore be a minimal impact upon the existing trees within the application site.��

Principle of Development

�

The application site is within the urban area of Maidstone, upon land not covered by any specific policy. In addition, it constitutes previously developed land, in accordance with Annex B of PPS3, as the land is the garden areas of a number of the existing dwellings. It is therefore considered that the principle of development within this locality is acceptable subject to all other material considerations being met.

Heads of Terms

The applicant has submitted details of the heads of terms for this particular development. This includes the following: -

�

A contribution of �17,640 (plus any legal costs) to the NHS West Kent Primary Care Trust.

A contribution of �22,050 for parks and open space, which would be spent within a 1mile radius of the application site.

A contribution of �17,276 for contributions towards Adult Education, Libraries, and Youth and Community facilities within the locality of the application site.

Due to the fact that 14 dwellings are proposed within this site, there would be no requirement upon the applicant to provide any affordable housing, as this falls beneath the threshold of the set out within the Development Plan.

These Heads of Terms are in accordance with the Council�s Development Plan.

Layout

The proposed layout was the subject of a significant level of pre-application discussion. It is proposed that a street be created, which would see pairs of semi-detached properties along one side, which would be set back varying distances from the street, with detached properties on the other side of the street. It is considered that whilst the properties are relatively uniform in design, the variation in the distances from the streets, together with the changes in level would ensure that the development would not appear monotonous, and would have a good level of interest. In addition, the development allows for a good level of soft landscaping to be provided to the front of each unit, which would add interest and soften these properties.

The form of the cul-de-sac would not be out of keeping with the character of the area. There are a number of other developments of a similar layout to this � indeed, Wilson Close is a cul-de-sac which has been created to the rear of Freeman�s Way � and as such, it is considered that this layout does respect the existing grain of development within the locality, and as such respects its context. However, this would see the provision of more green space, and indeed a more informal layout than much of the surrounding development, which is considered to be to its benefit.

It is therefore considered that the proposed layout is in accordance with the surrounding development, and meets with the requirements of both PPS1 and the Kent Design Guide.

Visual Amenity

The proposed development would see the erection of large properties within this backland site, and as such the question is raised as to whether this proposal respects the character and appearance of the locality. As previously stated, there is a variety of properties within the area, although there is no development which rises above two- storey (aside from the occasional property which has extended into the roof-slope. In addition, the properties within Wilson Close are all single storey, and as such one has to consider whether properties of the scale proposed would dominate these dwellings.

However, due to the significant changes in levels, it is not considered that these properties would dominate the properties to the front. The properties would be relatively well screened from most public vantage points to the west of the site. As one enters Wilson Close, the development would turn away from this access point, with most being set behind the existing development. This together with the changes in levels would ensure that this development would have little visual impact upon the wider area.

In any event, it is considered that the proposed dwellings are of a good standard of design, being of a relatively contemporary nature, with large areas of glazing, and the use of materials such as timber cladding, and render. The dwellings would also turn, and address the curve within the road, and would also be set at a lower level than the road surface. This would all add variety and interest to the development.

It is considered that a high quality landscape scheme will be required for a development of this nature, reflecting the high standard of design. Any landscape plan will be required to incorporate indigenous species both to relate to the context of the site, but also to ensure that these reflect the needs of the ecology within the locality.

Subject to the use of a high standard of materials throughout the development, and the submission of a high quality landscaping scheme, it is therefore considered that this proposal would represent a good standard of design, and as such accords with PPS1 and Policy BE1 of the South East Plan 2009.��

Impact upon Residential Amenity

The proposal is not considered to have a significantly detrimental impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

As stated, there are significant changes in levels throughout this site, which result in the proposed properties being set at a lower level than the exiting properties both within Wilson Close, and Freeman�s Way. The nearest property (plot 14) to the existing bungalows within Wilson Close would be set some 12metres from its flank boundary wall. Plot 13 would be some 14.5metres from the boundary with this dwelling, but the impact lessened further by the changes in level. Due to the topography, the first floor of these nearest proposed units would be at the same level as the ground floor of this neighbouring dwelling. These would therefore appear to be of the same bulk and mass (to the occupiers of this neighbouring property) as a bungalow, and by virtue of the level of separation, and the orientation (rear elevation facing side elevation) there would not be any significant loss of light, creation of a sense of enclosure, or overlooking generated by this proposal.

Plot 1 would again be adjacent to an existing bungalow within Wilson Close. However, this proposal would see the erection of a property whose side elevation would face the side elevation of the existing unit. Again, there would be a sufficient level of separation (10metres) and as such, this unit would not generate any overlooking, overshadowing, or the creation of a sense of enclosure.

Plots 11 and 12 of the proposed development would have rear facing windows, which would face the rear of properties within Freeman�s Close to the west of the site. However, whilst the proposed rear gardens are not significant in size, it is acknowledged that the �back to back� distances between these proposed units and those existing would be in excess of 25metres. As such, it is not considered that these units would give rise to any significant overshadowing, overlooking, or the creation of a sense of enclosure.�

In terms of the potential for the creation of noise and disturbance, whilst it is acknowledged that this use will be more intense than the existing three units (with rear gardens), the access road would be sited in such a way that it would be set away from existing dwellings, and the rear gardens of the majority of the properties would face away from the existing residential units. As such it is not considered that there would be any reason to refuse this application on this basis.�

It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in any significant impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

Highways

The Highways Authority has raised concerns about the lack of parking provision within the application site. The proposal incorporates one space per unit, which, for dwellings of this size is not a significant number. However, as well as specific spaces provided within the development, there would also be a significant level of on-street parking able to be provided. This is not a through road, and as such, for cars to park within the roadway would not have a detrimental impact upon highway safety. With on-street parking, the ratio of spaces available would rise to approximately 2 per unit � which is considered to be more suitable for houses of this size, within this location (which is some distance from the town centre). This Authority has encouraged this form of parking provision, as it allows for the properties to have a soft landscaped area to the front � which is considered to improve both the aesthetics of the development, but also reduces run off etc. Members should be aware that within PPG13 it states that Local Planning Authorities should not �require developers to provide more spaces than they themselves wish, other than in exceptional circumstances which might include for example, where there are significant implications for road safety which cannot be resolved through the introduction of enforcement of on-street parking controls.�� It is therefore considered that in this instance, due to the nature of the proposed road, i.e. serving only these units, and the low speeds in which vehicles would be likely to be travelling at, this lack of parking provision would not be to the detriment of highway safety, and as such, it is not considered that this application should be refused for the lack of parking provision.

Each unit would have space to provide bicycle storage facilities within their rear gardens, which would accord with the policies within the Development Plan.

The site is also closely served by bus routes No. 84 and No.85 which connect with the town centre and the hospital via Shepway and which run along Willington Street. The No.84 service runs hourly.

The access into Wilson Close is considered to be suitable, with no risk to highway safety. The additional units using this access can be accommodated within this particular stretch of road. A turning head has been demonstrated at the end of the access road. This would allow for refuse vehicles and fire appliances to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. This is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of the Development Plan.

It is therefore not considered that a refusal on highway safety grounds could be sustained at appeal.

Ecology

A full ecological assessment has been submitted with this application. This sets out that the development would avoid any significant adverse impacts upon designated sites of nature conservation, protected species or species of conservation interest.

As set out above, concerns have been raised by the Council�s Parks and Open Spaces Officer with regards to the development, and the impact that this would have upon the historic woodland to the rear. As previously set out, at present all of the application site constitutes the private gardens of the properties 5, 6 & 8 Wilson Close. This proposal sees the introduction of a �buffer strip� of land which will not form part of the residential curtilages of the new residential properties and which would see the land untouched, with all trees remaining in situ.

It is therefore considered that this is an improvement upon the existing situation, with this area set aside to improve biodiversity. This land would remain fenced-off from the community woodland, and would not become open for public use, but would integrate into this land in terms of its use. It is considered appropriate however to seek a detailed management plan upon this land to ensure that it is retained for this purpose in perpetuity. This is therefore suggested to form part of any legal agreement should Members resolve to grant planning permission.��

I understand that the proposals for seeking the designation of the woodland along the valley outside the site as a Local Wildlife Site or declaring it as a Local Nature Reserve are still under consideration. I do not consider that development of this site would prejudice these proposals. The securing through the legal agreement of a landscape/woodland and long-term management plan for the �blue-land� to the rear of the dwellings would, as indicated above, provide a buffer between the site and existing woodland and provide for enhanced biodiversity.��

The ecological assessment was completed in line with the requirements of Natural England Phase 1 survey methodology, assessing the site itself, and the impact upon its surroundings. The report identifies that the existing gardens are made up of grass and amenity shrubs which are of limited interest, as well as a number of trees which are of greater interest. A number of fruit trees are located within the application site.

The buildings and trees within the site were assessed for their potential to support bat roosts. All three houses were in a good state of repair, and no signs of use or potential access points were noted. It is likely that the woodland edge would be used by bats for foraging/commuting, and some trees within the site may also be used for this purpose. As such, it is proposed to retain all suitable trees, and also provide a buffer zone, where there would be no development (indeed this area would not even form part of the gardens of these properties) to ensure that there be no significant impact upon these bats. In addition, the report suggests that bat boxes be provided on the retained trees, and that bat bricks be provided within the new dwellings, in order that the habitat for bats be enhanced further.

The report acknowledges the possibility for both fox and grey squirrel to be within the locality. However, these are of negligible nature conservation importance, and are not considered to be adversely impacted by this proposal. The potential presence of hedgehog is of more significance, as it is included within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. It is therefore recommended that care be taken during vegetation clearance, and that in the event of any of these animals being discovered, they be afforded the opportunity to relocate of their own accord.

A number of common birds were recorded within the application site, and as such, it is recommended that vegetation be removed outside of the bird nesting season (March to August inclusive) in order to avoid a potential offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. In addition, recommendations for new native planting will provide replacement nesting and foraging resources for this group.

It is therefore considered that, subject to the recommendations of this report being adhered to (a condition is suggested to this effect), this proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the ecology within the area, and as such complies with the policies within the Development Plan.�

Impact upon the Trees

A tree survey has been submitted with this application, which recommends that five trees are to be felled due to their lack of stability, which the Council�s Landscape Officer agrees with. All other trees are to be retained, with conditions imposed to ensure that their roots are protected during construction.

Whilst a number of trees would be lost, most of these are small shrubs within the rear gardens of the existing properties, and could be mitigated against with the planting of new specimens as part of any comprehensive landscape plan.

As a result of the �buffer� zone to the rear, the proposed units would be some distance from the woodland in the valley. This together with the changes in level and the level of glazing to the rear, mean that the development would not result in a pressure to remove these trees by future occupiers of these units. As such, it is considered that this proposal does accord with the policies within the Development Plan.

Other Matters

The proposed development would be constructed to achieve Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.� The development will therefore meet a high level sustainability in its construction and future energy/water consumption. It is considered appropriate to impose a condition to ensure that this is complied with.

No details of lighting have been submitted for this development, and as such, it is considered appropriate to impose a condition to ensure that any street lighting proposed, does not result in glare or significant light spill into the rear gardens of the neighbouring occupiers. Likewise, that it also does not adversely impact upon the biodiversity within the neighbouring woodland.

Whilst there is a stream which runs to the rear of the site at the foot of the valley, this is set at approximately 15metres lower than the application site. It is therefore not considered that the application site would be liable to flood at any point, and as such this would not constitute a ground for refusal.

Questions have been raised with regards to the provision of refuse storage on the site. Each property has an area set aside for bin storage provision at the front, which would not be visually intrusive, and would also be at a point where access would be relatively straight-forward.

�

In addition, many local residents have raised concerns with regards to the drainage of the site. Consultations have been undertaken with Southern Water, who have suggested that a condition be imposed to ensure that the drainage be to an appropriate standard.

Conclusion

It is therefore considered that this proposal would be in accordance with the policies within the Development Plan. The proposal would respect the character and appearance of the area, and would not result in a detrimental impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties.

Whilst concern has been raised with regards to the parking provision within the site, it is considered that it would not be possible to defend a refusal on this basis at appeal.

The majority of the trees within the site are to be retained, which would be to the benefit of the character and appearance of the area.

It is therefore recommended that Members give this application favourable consideration and grant delegated powers to grant permission in this instance, subject to the completion of a suitable legal agreement and the conditions as set out below.

RECOMMENDATION

The PRIOR COMPLETION of a legal agreement, in such terms as the Head of Legal Services may advise to secure:

i) The provision of a sum of �22,050 to contribute towards the up-grade, improvement and renewal of Maidstone�s amenity space and play equipment;

i) The provision of a sum of �17,276 for contributions towards the additional demands placed upon the youth and community facilities, libraries and adult education facilities within the locality by virtue of the granting of this permission;�

ii) The sum of �17,640 for contributions towards the additional demands placed upon the Primary Care Trust (West Kent) by virtue of the granting of this permission.

iii) A detailed landscape and woodland management plan for all land outlined in blue within the planning application. Such details shall include its long-term management for all biodiversity within the site.

I BE GIVEN DELEGATED POWERS 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 buildings 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 in accordance with PPS1.

3. The development shall not commence until, details of hard 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 in accordance with PPS1.

4. The development shall not commence until, details of the proposed slab levels of the buildings and the existing site levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be completed strictly in accordance with the approved levels;

Reason: In order to secure a satisfactory form of development having regard to the topography of the site in accordance with PPS1.

5. The development shall not commence until, details of all fencing, walling and other boundary treatments 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 and maintained thereafter;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and to safeguard the enjoyment of their properties by existing and prospective occupiers in accordance with PPS1.

6. 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 in accordance with PPG13.

7. No development shall take place 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 in the interests of the visual amenity of the locality in accordance with PPS1 and Policy ENV6 of the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.

8. 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 buildings 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 in accordance with PPS1.

9. 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'. No work shall take place on site until full details of protection have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved barriers and/or ground protection shall be erected before any equipment, machinery or materials are 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 in accordance with PPS1.

10. Development shall not take place until details, in the form of large scale drawings (at a scale of 1:20 or 1:50) of the following matters have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority;

i) � Details of the roof overhangs;
ii) Details of windows and doors (including garage doors) and recesses/reveals, which shall be a minimum of 100mm.
��
The development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the subsequently approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory external appearance to the development in the interests of the visual amenity and character of the surrounding area in accordance with PPS1.

11. The dwellings shall achieve Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. No dwelling shall be occupied until a final Code Certificate has been issued for it certifying that Code Level 3 has been achieved.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable and energy efficient form of development in accordance with policy CC4 of the South East Plan 2009, Kent Design 2005 and PPS1.

12. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of any lighting to be placed or erected within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include, inter-alia, details of measures to shield and direct light from the light sources so as to prevent light pollution. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the subsequently approved details and no further lighting shall be introduced into the site without the prior approval of the local planning authority.

Reason: To prevent light pollution in the interests of the character and amenity of the area in general pursuant to Policy ENV49 of the Maidstone-Wide Local Plan 2000.

13. No development shall take place until details of a scheme of foul and surface water drainage for the site have been submitted to an approved by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the subsequently approved details.

Reason: To ensure adequate drainage arrangements pursuant to policy CF16 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.

14. An Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) should be submitted for approval, to include details of any works or operations in the vicinity of retained trees both on and off site, detailing construction or installation methods to avoid damage to trees. The AMS should be in accordance with the recommendations of BS5837 (2005) and include a schedule of any proposed pruning works to retained trees.

Reason: to ensure the successful long-term retention of retained trees in the interests of the visual amenity of the area in accordance with PPS1.

15. No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for the retainment of areas of cordwood from any tree works within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;

Reason: In the interest of biodiversity enhancement in accordance with PPS9.

16. Removal of existing trees or hedgerows containing nesting birds shall take place outside of the bird-breeding season (generally March to August).�

Reason: To ensure that nesting birds are not disturbed in accordance with PPS9.

17. No development shall take place until details of provision within the site to accommodate operatives, and construction vehicles loading/off-loading and turning and of parking spaces for site personnel/operatives/visitors have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The subsequently approved details shall thereafter be implemented and maintained until the construction phase of the development has been completed.

Reason: To ensure that vehicles can be parked or manoeuvred off the highway in the interests of highway safety in accordance with PPG13.

18. The proposed development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations as set out within the ecological report submitted to the Local Planning Authority on the 17 November 2008.

Reason: In the interests of biodiversity within the locality in accordance with PPS9.�

Informatives set out below

Attention is drawn to Sections 60 and 61 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 and to the Associated British Standard Code of practice BS5228:1997 for noise control on construction sites. Statutory requirements are laid down for control of noise during works of construction and demolition and you are advised to contact the Environmental Health Manager regarding noise control requirements.

Clearance and subsequent burning of existing woodland or rubbish must be carried out without nuisance from smoke, etc. to nearby residential properties. Advice on minimising any potential nuisance is available from the Environmental Health Manager.

Plant and machinery used for demolition and construction shall only be operated within the application site between 0800 hours and 1900 hours on Mondays to Fridays and between 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sunday and Bank Holidays.

No vehicles may arrive, depart, be loaded or unloaded within the general site except between the hours of 0800 and 1900 Mondays to Fridays and 0800 and 1300 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Adequate and suitable provision in the form of water sprays should be used to reduce dust from demolition work.

The importance of notifying local residents in advance of any unavoidably noisy operations, particularly when these are to take place outside of the normal working hours is advisable.

The developer shall implement a scheme for the use of wheel cleaning, dust laying and road sweeping, to ensure that vehicles do not deposit mud and other materials on the public highway in the vicinity of the site or create a dust nuisance.

You are advised to ensure that the appointed contractor(s) is/are registered with the 'Considerate Constructors Scheme' and that the site is thereafter managed in accordance with the Scheme. Further information can be found at� www.considerateconstructorsscheme.org.uk

The applicant is advised that it would be appropriate to incorporate bat bricks within the development hereby proposed in order to promote the biodiversity of the site.

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