Agenda item

Peninsula

Demolition of existing dwelling and outbuildings and erection of 30 residential dwellings including affordable housing. Creation of a new access from Sharnal Street, associated car parking, hard standing, landscaping, open spaces, infrastructure including drainage and earthworks.

Discussion:

Councillor Thorne was unable to take part in the determination of this planning application due to not being present for part of the presentation as a result of a short power cut.

The Planning Manager outlined the planning application in detail and informed the Committee that whilst officers had no objections to the design of the proposed development, the site was situated in a rural location detached from local services and in an area where there were no footpaths or street lighting thus making it difficult for residents to walk to the nearest village. Therefore, occupiers of the site would be heavily reliant upon use of private vehicles.

In addition, she advised that whilst there was an area of open space within the proposed development site, this was centred around a protected oak tree (T21) which was to be retained as it had been identified as a key arboricultural feature in the revised aboricultural report dated 9 September 2020. The open space was to also provide play area space which in terms of standards was not considered to be sufficiently located away from proposed residential properties. The Planning Manager advised that on balance, this was acceptable due to the arrangement of the play equipment as a trim trail.

The Planning Manager referred to the applicant’s proposed actions to reduce carbon emissions as set out on page 25 of the agenda and advised that should the Committee be minded to approve the application, an appropriate condition would be required in this respect.

The Planning Manager also drew attention to a letter received from the applicant since publication of the agenda which was appended to the supplementary agenda advice sheet which sought to address concerns set out within the report.

The Principal Transport Manger addressed concerns relating to the impact upon the highway of the proposed development referring to the Visual Splays Guidance produced by the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation ‘Manual for Streets 2’ and the Highways Agency’s ‘Design Manual for Roads and Bridges’.

He explained that having assessed the application site, officers were not satisfied that the visual splays to the North were sufficient for access onto a road that was narrow and heavily used by HGVs. Photographs of the access were displayed as part of the presentation.

With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Sands addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and expressed the following concerns:

• The application site is located on a road that is recognised locally as being dangerous with frequent accidents resulting in two fatalities in recent years.
• There is little public transport serving the area and therefore future occupiers of the development will be reliant upon the use of private vehicles to access all facilities such as schools, churches, the village hall and GP services. The shop located in the garage is only suitable for top up shopping.
• If approved, it is possible that occupants of each house will own at least two vehicles and this will result in a great increase in vehicle movements which will impact air quality in the area.

The Committee discussed the application and noted the points raised by officers and the local Ward Councillor.

It was noted that there were already approximately 20 properties which had direct access onto the highway along this stretch of road and, therefore, the addition of a further 30 properties was considered a substantial increase in the number of vehicular movements onto a road that is already heavily used by traffic, including HGVs.

The Committee welcomed the desire of a Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) house builder to undertake a project in Medway, but considered that to be acceptable, the project was required to be sited in the correct location and unfortunately this site was not considered acceptable due to its location on a very busy highway and being located so far from the village of High Halstow.

The Committee also discussed the provision of affordable housing should the application be approved and the Head of Planning advised that although the applicant had been willing to provide an element of affordable housing as part of the development, no affordable housing providers were willing to take on the units at the site. The Head of Planning advised that he had approached both the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MCLHG) and Homes England and had expressed concern as to the provision of affordable housing in rural areas. Recognising the affordable housing need in rural areas despite the lack of Registered Provider take up, the developer had offered a commuted sum to allow the provision of affordable housing off site.

Decision:

Refused on the following grounds:

1          As a result of the rural location of the site, the proposed development for residential purposes is considered to be detached from local services and in an area where walking to the nearest village would be via a country lane with no footpaths or street lighting. The occupiers of the site would be heavily reliant on private vehicles as the alternative modes of travel are limited and employment opportunities are lacking. The proposal fails to contribute to the vitality of rural communities and is contrary to Policy BNE25 of the Medway Local Plan 2003 and paragraph 78 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

2          The proposed development would result in a significant and detrimental impact on the highway safety, given the proposed access arrangements on to Sharnal Street and therefore would be in conflict with Policies T1 and T2 of Medway Local Plan 2003 and paragraph 109 of National Planning Policy Framework 2019.