DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD 5 January 2006 Reference: 05/00928/FUL Officer: Mr David Jeanes Location: Proposal: Applicant: Whiffens Farm Clement Street Sutton-At-Hone Kent BR8 7PQ Retrospective application for demolition of remaining part of building and erection of a single storey detached building to provide 4 x B1 Use (Office) Units Medway Design & Build Ltd Agent: Stewart Elcomb 18 Crook Log Bexleyheath Kent DA16 8BP Date Valid: 13/09/2005 Parish / Ward: Sutton At Hone & Hawley P.C. / Sutton At Hone RECOMMENDATION: Defer for delegated approval (subject to outstanding matters being satisfactorily resolved) SITE SPECIFIC POLICY (1) Dartford Local Plan: Metropolitan Green Belt, Special Landscape Area (2) Local Plan Review Second Deposit Draft: Metropolitan Green Belt SITE DESCRIPTION (3) The site is 0.14 hectares and is located on the northern side of Clement Street at its junction with Goss Hill. The site is currently occupied by various buildings arranged around a courtyard with access taken directly from the junction. (4) The site is surrounded by open space except for a residential property to the south-west on the opposite side of Clement Street, Whiffens Cottage. This lies within Sevenoaks District, Clement Street forming part of the Borough boundary. PROPOSAL (5) The application seeks retrospective permission for demolition of the remaining part of a building and the erection of a single storey detached building to provide 4 x B1 Use (Office) Units. These works have already been undertaken. The building erected replaces a building of identical footprint and dimensions. The building has a floorspace of some 147m². RELEVANT HISTORY
(6) There is an extensive planning history for this site. Historically, this and other buildings on the application site were in agricultural use. Since 1985 there have been various applications for changes of use and the erection of additional buildings. Save for the building the subject of this application, all other buildings on the site are currently in use for B1 and B8 purposes, with permission granted periodically between 1997 and 2000. (7) The application building has in the past provided for stable provision although in part has previously been granted permission for a change of use to B1. In 2001 an application was submitted seeking a change of use to B1 in respect of further parts of the building. Officers were minded to grant permission for the change of use subject to consideration of on site parking. The application was held in abeyance until this year when the application was withdrawn following a change of ownership. It would appear that this building has been used for non-agricultural purposes previously without the benefit of planning permission. COMMENTS FROM ORGANISATIONS (8) Kent Highway Services: As this is a replacement building no objection subject to conditions to secure parking plan, travel plan and each unit to be let different occupiers. (9) Sevenoaks District Council: Concerned that the proposal appears to constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt without any very special circumstances. Conclude, however, that this is a matter for the local authority. (10) Environmental Health Services Manager: Suggests that a contaminated land assessment is undertaken prior to determination in accordance with PPS23. Recommends conditions in respect of hours of construction and prohibition of bonfires. NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION (11) No representations received. RELEVANT POLICIES (12) Dartford Local Plan: Policy B1 is a general environmental proposal applicable to all development proposals. Policy E9 relates to employment uses outside identified sites or employment areas. Policy C1 concerns development in the countryside with policy GB2 applicable in the Green Belt. Policy C8 states that the Landscape of the North Downs Special Landscape Area will be given long term protection with priority over other planning considerations. Policy T22 is relevant in respect of parking provision. (13) Local Plan Review Second Deposit Draft: Policies DD11, E8, GB3, C1 and T11 of the Local Plan Review essentially replicate the above considerations. However, this site is no longer designated as lying within a Special Landscape Area. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER'S COMMENTS Key Issues (14) I am of the opinion that the key issues are whether or not the building, as constructed and use therein are appropriate within the Green Belt, whether there is an adverse impact upon the Green Belt or the amenities of neighbouring properties, parking and highways and other matters. Principle of Development (15) Notwithstanding that this is replacement building within the Green Belt, in the context of PPG2, local plan policy GB2 and local plan review policy GB2 this is a new building within the Green Belt. New buildings within the Green Belt are inappropriate development except in certain circumstances. This building does not fall within the scope of new buildings that may
be considered appropriate development. Therefore this must be considered inappropriate development in the Green Belt and a departure from the local plan and has been advertised as such. (16) Members will wish to consider whether there are very special circumstances in this case whereby a departure from the Green Belt policies of the local plan may be permissible. The key question is whether this would be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt and whether this would significantly prejudice the implementation of Green Belt policies. In this respect regard must be had to the impact upon the Green Belt, as considered below. (17) Local Plan and Local Plan Review countryside policies allow for development in the countryside, subject to certain criteria and employment policies allow for employment generating uses outside recognised employment areas and this does not preclude the Green Belt. I raise no in principle objection in respect of these matters. Impact upon the Metropolitan Green Belt (18) The application relates to a new building within the Green Belt. However, this replaces a building of equal footprint and dimensions. Historical maps show that there have been buildings on this site since 1860 and in the position of the application building, in part, since 1932. As built form on this part of the site is a longstanding feature and the application building is a direct replacement for that previously existing I am of the opinion that the replacement building has no materially greater impact upon the openness of the Green Belt. I consider these site-specific circumstances to be such that they constitute very special circumstances whereby this development within the Green Belt is permissible. (19) Whilst a departure from the local plan I do not consider that this need be referred to the Government Office for the South East. The Town and Country Planning (Development Plans And Consultation) (Departures) Directions 1999 require that the Secretary of State be notified where a local planning authority is minded to approve a 'development which, by reason of its scale or nature or the location of the land, would significantly prejudice the implementation of the development plan's policies and proposals'. Having regard to the small-scale nature of the building and fact that this is a replacement I do not consider that local plan policies would be significantly prejudiced. Further, I have paid due regard to the fact that a B1 use is proposed, which by definition are not particularly intrusive. Therefore, referral is not necessary. (20) Having regard to the above and the argument that this is effectively re-use of a building, in considering the appropriateness of the use I would draw upon the criteria as set out in Local Plan Review policy GB3 in relation to re-use of buildings. That policy would not advise against a use of this nature providing there is no material impact upon the openness of the Green Belt. The issue of the built form is addressed above and whilst the use results in movement of vehicles and persons both to and from and within the site I consider that this is not of itself materially harmful within the Green Belt. In forming such an opinion I have had regard to the fact that this a replacement building and lies within a small development of other traffic generating uses. (21) In seeking to ensure that there is no greater impact upon the openness of the Green Belt as a result of this use I am of the opinion that conditions to restrict the nature of the use, extensions to the building and open storage can be reasonably applied. (22) Having regard to the fact that this site no longer lies within the designated Special Landscape Area in accordance with Local Plan Review Second Deposit Draft and is an existing building I consider there to be no conflict with policy C8 of the Dartford Local Plan. Amenity Issues (23) There are no residential properties that lie immediately adjacent to the application site. Consequently, the built form would have no impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of any neighbouring property. Similarly, having regard to the fact that there are no residential properties adjacent I do not consider that residential amenity would be compromised as a
result of the use. In any event, the application seeks permission for B1 use, being a use that can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area. Consequently, subject to a condition restricting the use to B1, I do not consider that there would be any adverse amenity implications. Parking and Highways (24) In accordance with Local Plan Review Amended Second Deposit Draft the parking standard for this use is 5 spaces. The nature of the site is such that I consider that sufficient parking provision can be met within the curtilage and I would raise no objection in this respect. Kent Highway Services consider it necessary that the applicant submit details to show where the parking would be accommodated within the site and to ensure that this is kept available for such purposes. This could be secured by condition were Members minded to grant planning permission. Further, in order to reduce parking pressures and to prevent to the use form having an adverse impact upon the functioning of the highway Kent Highway Services request conditions to secure a travel plan and to ensure separate occupancy of the units. I consider the imposition of such conditions to be reasonable in the circumstances. (25) Kent Highway Services advise that the siting of building is not ideal in terms of the access and sightlines. However, it is acknowledged that this is long standing arrangement and no objection is raised in this respect. Outstanding Matters (26) A Preliminary Risk Assessment has been undertaken on behalf of the applicant and a report submitted. This has been forwarded to the relevant consultees for consideration. At the time of writing I have not received a response. Should additional information be available this will be made available to Members in the update. Additional conditions may be required subsequent to consultation responses. I propose a deferral for delegated approval in order to resolve this outstanding matter. HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS (27) I have considered the application in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998. I am satisfied that my analysis of the issues in this case and my consequent recommendation are compatible with the Act. CONCLUSIONS (28) Notwithstanding the conflict with the adopted local plan I consider there to be very special circumstances such that there is no material harm to the openness of the Green Belt. I do not consider that the implementation of local plan policies would be significantly prejudiced and in such circumstances referral to the Secretary of State is not necessary. I am of the opinion that the development would have no adverse impact upon amenity of the functioning of the highway. Accordingly, subject to conditions, I recommend that planning permission be granted. RECOMMENDATION: Defer for delegated approval (subject to outstanding matters being satisfactorily resolved) 01 Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved a parking plan demonstrating on-site parking provision shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. Thereafter, the approved details shall be implemented and the parking spaces, turning areas and means of access shall be kept available for such use at all
times and no development, whether permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or not, shall be carried out on that area of land or to preclude vehicular access thereto. 01 To ensure the permanent retention of satisfactory car parking facilities in accordance with the Local Planning Authority's standards in accordance with Policies B1 and T22 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan. 02 Prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved a Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the local authority, which seeks to promote decreased private car dependency and an increase in alternative forms of transport. Thereafter, the Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 02 To promote sustainable travel in accordance with the local planning authority's adopted policy. 03 Each of the four units hereby approved shall be in separate occupation and only for uses within Use Class B1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or in any provision equivalent to that class in any statutory instrument revoking and reenacting that Order. 03 In the interests of amenities and highway safety in accordance with Policies B1 and T22 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan. 04 No materials shall be burnt on site. 04 To protect the amenities of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policies E14 and B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan. 05 The use shall not be carried on outside the hours of 08.00 to 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and 08.00 to 13.00 Saturdays with no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by or on behalf of the District Planning Authority. 05 To avoid unreasonable disturbance outside normal working hours to nearby residential properties contrary to Policies B1 and H12 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan. 06 Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A Part 8 to Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any provision equivalent to that class and part in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order no extension or alteration of any part of the development hereby approved shall be undertaken without the prior permission of the Local Planning Authority. 06 To enable the Local Planning Authority to consider any further developmenton its merits, having regard to the amount of development already permitted on the site and in accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.
Application No:: 05/00928/FUL Address : Whiffens Farm Clement Street Sutton-At-Hone Kent BR8 7PQ Date: 21 December 2005 Scale: 1:1250