Item 12, Page 6 LITTLE CLOCK HOUSE, GEORGE STREET,
HUNTON, MAIDSTONE, KENT
Reference Number: MA/12/0152
Additional comments
Cllr Rodd Nelson-Gracie has made the following comments:
"Following a lobbying call by a local resident, I would like to emphasise the following three points:
1. This area is a Special Landscape Area, and any development should be treated sensitively. A gypsy application in Hunton was refused last year for this reason. The fact that over 75 reasons of concern were put forward by local residents emphasises this issue.
- I note that condition 8 suggests that vehicles of 7.5T gvw may be parked on the land. I would feel a maximum weight of 3.5T would be more appropriate in this country lane
- Condition 4 (and 5) suggests landscaping. I cannot emphasise enough that there needs to be proper landscaping on all sides of the plot, particularly the east and south, and a stong monitoring action should take place to ensure this is implemented and properly maintained
I also endorse the comments by Hunton Parish Council!"
KCC Ecology have also offered advice as follows:
“The sheds appear to be of a corrugated iron/metal construction which do not present many crevices that would be suitable for bats. In addition the temperatures within any crevices will fluctuate significantly according to the weather, which further reduces the potential for bat use.
Where there is ready access to internal spaces, there might be potential for birds roosting within the sheds. We therefore recommend that works to remove the structures is conducted outside of the bird breeding season to ensure that no offences are committed. Generally speaking, the bird breeding season is between March and August. This could be an informative attached to a permission, or secured by condition - opinions amongst LPAs vary about which is the most appropriate”.
Additional representations
A further TWELVE local residences have made comments on this application. In the main the same points have been raised as in the representations already summarised in the main papers.
Further comments and information have also been received from another FOUR local residences that had already made representations. These comments and information in part supplement that already submitted, but also raise further points:
*consideration should be given as to whether additional change would further detract from the heritage asset
*whether the setting of the heritage asset would impact on its economic and social viability
*LPA’s should identify opportunities through changes in the setting of heritage assets for enhancement
*there is no description of the significance of the heritage asset in the application
*English Heritage have not been consulted.
*the cumulative impact of small scale change can have as great an affect on a heritage asset as large scale development.
*the tall tree screen near the rear of the site should not be used in favour of the application – and could this be reduced to 2 metres in height as it effects fertility on adjacent land.
*Personal need should not form part of the application.
*No need for this site for permanent gypsy/traveller occupancy.
* No consideration of additional cars that would result, and is insufficient room on site for these and the commercial vehicles, especially a distance back of over 11 metres from the highway.
*Existing conifers, fencing and walling not suitable.
* Only 3.5T vehicles have been applied for, not 7.5T as per limit on the suggested condition.
*Majority (not some) of nearby buildings are listed.
Officer Comment
In response to the comments raised concerning the setting of the grade 2*
listed building as a heritage asset, I would point to the comments of the
Conservation Officer. Although these state that ”there would be likely to be at
least some adverse impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings”, this in
itself, as set out in the main papers, also confirms that any impact would not
be significant. On this basis, it is also considered that the development would
not affect the setting of the listed building, and therefore no consultation has
been carried out with English Heritage.
With regard to the matter of the tall tree screen that has been raised, the existing recommended conditions on the main papers should adequately ensure that any boundary treatments and landscaping are not only suitable, but also that they provide effective screening of the development from the surrounding area and also protection of nearby residential amenity.
The application applies for the parking of four commercial vehicles and does not state a desirable weight limit of those vehicles. The 7.5T weight limit stated in the recommended condition is therefore in accordance with the suggestions of KENT HIGHWAYS in their consultation response.
A site layout condition is now also recommended to ensure these arrangements are acceptable and adequate.
Other issues raised have already been dealt with in the main papers.
It is also alleged in one of the further comments made that the report on the main papers is inaccurate and contains omissions, but it is not specified what these are.
Additional Condition (11)
Within one month of the date of this decision a scaled plan shall be submitted, for approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority, showing the internal layout of the site and detailing the positioning of the approved mobile homes and the areas to be used for the approved parking of the four commercial vehicles.
Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the countryside.
Additional wording to Reason of Condition 8
The wording “and highway safety” needs to be included in the reason for condition 8 on the main papers.
Additional Informative
It is recommended that any works required to remove any of the structures on the site are conducted outside of the bird breeding season to ensure that no offences are committed. Generally, the bird breeding season is between March and August in any year.