Agenda item

Twydall

Change of use of amenity land to residential to facilitate the installation of a vehicle crossover and hardstanding to front.

Discussion:

The Planning Manager outlined the planning application and suggested that if the Committee was minded to support refusal of this planning application, proposed refusal ground 2 required amendment, details of which were set out on the supplementary agenda advice sheet.

The Senior Tree Officer referred to a previous scheme to provide a vehicular crossover at this site in 2012 which had been refused. He outlined the reasons why the current application for a vehicle crossover and provision of a hardstanding was considered unacceptable and, in particular, advised that following an assessment, it had been concluded that there was insufficient space to install a standard construction vehicle crossing outside 218 Beechings Way without damaging the existing mature lime tree growing on the highway verge outside the property.

He advised that the proposal had not been supported by an assessment of the impact that the construction of a vehicle crossing would have on the tree and the absence of this information was contrary to the recommendations set out in British Standards 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and constructions – Recommendations; the Medway Council guidance document “Vehicle Crossing Guidance and Self-Assessment”; Policy 11 of the Medway Council Tree Management Policy; and Policy BNE43 of the Local Plan and Paragraph 170 of the NPPF.

He acknowledged that there were a number of existing vehicle crossovers near the application site at 193, 197, 203, 207, 210, 214 and 226 Beechings Way and advised that following a search of planning records, five did not have the benefit of planning permission and would now be immune from planning enforcement due to the passage of time. Of the two that had the benefit of planning permission, one had not been constructed in accordance with the approved plan and had been constructed closer to a tree than it should have been but was also immune from planning enforcement and the other one had been constructed in accordance with the principles set out in the version of British Standard 5837 relevant at the time.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Griffiths addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and advised that since the development of Twydall, car ownership had increased considerably and to address this issue there had been an agreement that vehicle crossovers would be permissible provided that they were not problematic and did not affect the street trees. He referred to the existing vehicle crossovers and stated that none of these had resulted in any distress to the trees and, as many of these had been constructed without the benefit of obtaining planning permission, the current applicant was being punished by following the rules.

Councillor Griffiths also advised that the footpath along Beechings Way had been widened in recent years and a cycle path added without causing detriment to the trees.

The Committee discussed the application and in response to questions, the Senior Tree Officer provided information as to the likely depth of the roots of the trees in Beechings Way.

A Member commented that the provision of vehicular crossovers alleviated the parking of cars on the grass verges which led to damage to the grass in inclement weather.

Members questioned whether it was possible for alternative materials to be used for the provision of a vehicular crossover which would not necessitate construction to the depth of 500mm. However, the Senior Tree Officer advised that construction involving excavation to a depth in excess of 200mm would be required owing to the changes in the levels and the need for the crossover to take the weight of a vehicle. Therefore such alternative surfaces would not be suitable in this instance.

He confirmed that different species of trees have differing reactions to root tolerance and whilst limes were fairly tolerant, the proposed vehicular crossover would require an excavation to a depth of 500mm right across the root protection area.

Decision:

Approved subject to conditions and the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to approve the wording if the conditions with the Chairman and Opposition Spokesperson outside of the meeting.