Senior Planning Officer Andrew Byrne Sevenoaks District Council Community & Planning Services PO Box 183 Argyle Road Sevenoaks Kent TN13 1GN 04 November 2011 Your Ref: 11/02258/FUL For the attention of Mr Andrew Byrne Dear Mr Byrne, LETTER OF OBJECTION LAND TO THE SOUTH WEST OF FORGE GARAGE, HIGH STREET, PENSHURST, KENT, TN11 8BU I write to you concerning an application for the erection of 6 affordable dwellings with associated access and landscape works at the above site which has been submitted by West Kent Housing Association. As you will appreciate, the site is located in a highly sensitive rural location and is within the confines of the Green Belt, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the Penshurst Conservation Area. It is also located close to Listed Buildings in the village including The Forge Garage which is directly adjacent to the proposed site access and the Grade II* Listed Building at Star House which is on the opposite side of the road to the application site. The site can therefore be defined as being within a highly sensitive location. From reviewing planning policy, the main issues to be determined in this case are as follows: Whether the proposed development is appropriate in the Green Belt; What impact it would have on the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; What impact it would have on the Penshurst Village Conservation Area in this location; Whether any harm would be caused to highway/pedestrian safety. Green Belt Appropriateness I have reviewed the Planning, Design & Access Statement submitted by the applicant s agents SmithsGore. Within this submission the applicant acknowledges the proposal represents an inappropriate form of development by definition considering the sites Green Belt location. Within such a restrictive area, the erection of dwellinghouses is not permissible. The applicant, therefore, acknowledges that very special circumstances need to be proven to exist in the submissions made in order for permission to be granted. 1.
In terms of the very special circumstances, case law establishes that the benefits from any proposed development of this nature in the Green Belt must clearly outweigh the harm both by definition and actual harm that would be caused by the nature of works proposed. The applicant covers this issue in paragraph 5.17 to 5.24 of the Planning, Design & Access Statement. In terms of its argument advanced, this relies solely on the conclusions of the Housing Needs Survey for the Parish of Penshurst. This report concluded there was a local need to provide approximately five affordable housing units, not six as proposed. The sixth was actually proposed by Bill Hughes of Smiths Gore at the Steering Group meeting on 4 th March 2010, when the proposal was for a medical centre, car park and public wc s as well as the homes. BH advised still keen to consider potential for a 6 th unit to be used as a caretakers flat The needs survey did not however specify that affordable homes should all be located on the one site in the village. No additional special circumstances have been advanced in the submissions made. In terms of the recognition of the harm that would be caused by the development of Forge Field, the applicant submits in paragraph 5.22 of the Planning, Design and Access Statement that The proposed development is well related to the existing village and is not considered to harm the visual amenity of the Green Belt. Paragraph 5.23 goes on to assert that it would be visually assimilated into the existing village and would not extend into the wider countryside beyond. It is also stated that the decrease in the openness of the green belt would be minimised through the siting of the development on a relatively enclosed site adjacent to the existing village. In contrast to these statements, it is submitted that the harm by the application representing inappropriate development within the Green Belt by definition along with the actual harm that would be caused to the openness of the Green Belt in this location is severe and clearly outweighs any perceived benefit from developing the site at Forge Field for affordable housing. As you will appreciate, the site is currently a meadow and forms the traditional village buffer to expansive open land to the south east and south of the village. It is entirely open in appearance and forms an important characteristic of this part of the Green Belt. Any new development on Forge Field will clearly have a substantial impact on the openness of this location and the character of the Green Belt in this position. This would cause substantial actual harm to the character and appearance of the Green Belt and the level of openness currently appreciated. The impact of the proposed houses would be exacerbated given that it would comprise 6 substantial dwellings. Although an attempt has been made to break-up proposed built form by splitting the units into two pairs of three terraced houses, this would do little to soften the impact of the additional and visual bulk of built form that is proposed. The dwellings proposed are substantial in terms of their height, scale and massing. Taking all of these factors 2.
into account, they would clearly cause harm to Green Belt Openness and this harm would outweigh any benefit in terms of affordable housing provision. Further actual harm would be caused by the access and parking arrangements. This includes the provision of an expansive area of hardstanding to enable the site to accommodate parking to the rear in accordance with Council standards for this unsustainable location and to enable service vehicles to access the site as required by the Highways Authority. It would appear that parking has been proposed to the rear in order to reduce the possible impact of this feature on the character and appearance of the village Conservation Area. However, the side effect of this arrangement is that the parking, and extensive area of hardstanding that would be required, would cause clear and noticeable harm to Green Belt openness. Furthermore, in attempts to improve the site access, the land has to be opened up at the front of the site to enable adequate visibility splays to be achieved. This would involve the removal of substantial historic hedgerow that would impact upon both the village character and Green Belt openness. Taking all of these material considerations into account, and contrary to the applicants assertions, substantial actual harm to the Green Belt would be significant and would outweigh the single special circumstance that is referenced by the applicant. Taking this balancing exercise into account, the site is clearly not suitable for the provision of additional affordable housing within the village. The proposed development, which intends to use only part of an open field, represents a visually jarring form of development that would contrary to Green Belt policy. Therefore, it is submitted that the Council should refuse planning permission on the grounds that very special circumstances do not exist. The Council should quote PPG2 in its refusal notice on this ground. Impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) The argument in terms of impact on the AONB is similar to the argument relating to the impact on Green Belt openness referenced above. However, policy contained within both the Sevenoaks Core Strategy and the Sevenoaks District Local Plan provides further protective powers which seek for the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty to be conserved and enhanced given its National importance. This policy framework adds further weight to the argument that no development should cause harm the openness and sensitivity of this land. The expansive built form that is proposed would cause harm to the character of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and would not enhance or conserve its appearance in this position. Therefore, it is submitted that planning permission should be refused on the ground of harm to the AONB quoting paragraph 3.3.1 of the Core Strategy which details the spatial vision for the District and Adopted Local Plan 3.
Policy EN6. Both of these policies concern the protection of the District s Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Harm to Conservation Area and Historic Buildings Whilst it is acknowledged that the design of the proposed houses is of good architectural merit, it would, however, be highly imposing in this part of the village and would appear as an alien addition to the historic fabric of Penshurst. Its impact would be exacerbated with the applicant s intention to site the dwellings away from the road as this would appear out of keeping with the established building lines in Penshurst High Street where residential properties are located close to the highway. The additional and substantial new built form along with associated paraphernalia is also likely to impact on the setting of the Grade 2* Listed Building at Star House which currently enjoys an open aspect on to land to its north east. In the Penshurst Conservation Area Appraisal, adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance by Sevenoaks District Council in 2011, it comments; One of these, [historically interesting enough to List] Star House, is in a prominent position which can be seen from Rogues Hill. It is vistas such as these which are important in uniting the extended boundaries of the village and creating a sense of place and As the road leaves the village to the south west there are some splendid views across the river valley to Rogues Hill and the open countryside beyond. A number of properties take advantage of the higher ground to make the most of these vistas, and can themselves be seen from the opposite side of the valley.star House and the Birches are both listed In 2010, English Heritage, in their listing of Forge Stores, stated; The Old Smithy (a.k.a. Forge Stores) and Forge Garage Cottage are designated at Grade II for the following principal reasons: Group value: with the Grade II* listed Star House, and as part of a larger, historically significant ensemble of vernacular revival buildings in the centre of Penshurst In terms of the alterations to the existing access which is proposed in an attempt to address highways concerns, these would involve the removal of an existing mature hedgerow to enable the required visibility splays to be achieved. However, the side effect of improving visibility at the site s access/egress is that the removal of this hedgerow and the engineering works required would visually scar this part of the village Conservation Area to the detriment of its essential historic value. Furthermore, given the extreme proximity of the Forge Garage to the access, the setting of this Listed Building would be substantially harmed by the expansive introduction of hardstanding and the engineering operations required. Therefore, the application would be contrary to National Planning Policy Guidance contained within PPS5 which seeks to protect the Nation s historic environment and important Heritage Assets. 4.
Highway Safety It is acknowledged that attempts have been made to improve the visibility splays to the west and south west of the proposed access. This, as detailed above, comes with its own substantial problems in terms of the effect of improving the sight lines available would have on the openness of the land and historical setting of this part of the village. However, substantial concerns continue to exist that the arrangement of the access would still be far from ideal. Vehicles travelling into the village from the south do so at speed and, therefore, cars emerging onto the highway from the application site would still present a hazard to both vehicular and pedestrian safety. This is likely to be exacerbated by the change in slab level that is proposed as shown on the elevation drawings provided by the applicant. It would appear that the dwellings are to be positioned at a lower level in an attempt to reduce their prominence. However, as a result of this, the access would need to slope upwards to meet the existing road level. This would possibly involve the need for a retaining wall to be introduced at the site access and vehicles manoeuvring up the slope to the highway would have limited visibility in either direction as a result. No details are provided by the applicant in terms of the appearance of the proposed access where this meets the highway. These details are essential in order for the Council to properly assess the application. A street scene plan should, therefore, be provided by the applicant and clarification of how the access would appear in this location should also be provided prior to the Council determining the application. Many residents in the village are extremely concerned that the access will present a significant traffic hazard, particularly during the school runs to Penshurst Church of England Primary School which is also directly opposite Forge Field. At present, parents and guardians park on the road outside the school adjacent to Forge Field and this arrangement is likely to continue. The existence of cars parked in this position would clearly reduce the visibility available at the site access and this is likely to cause further harm to highway safety. It is acknowledged that the applicant has had pre-application discussions with the Highways Authority. However a full Transport Report by a qualified Highways Consultant should have been submitted with the application in light of the various issues that exist from this point of view. At present, the application is unacceptable and contrary to policy which seeks to protect highway and pedestrian safety. Other Matters In terms of other concerns, it is acknowledged that the applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment and has stated this would not normally need to be provided for a site shown to be in a flood zone one on the Environmental Agency Flood Map. However, whilst this may normally be the case, the application shows that the slab level of the proposed dwelling is likely to be reduced for what appears to be between 1½m and 2m at the front of the properties. Little comment is made within the Flood Risk Assessment regarding the change in slab level that is proposed and the impact that this could potentially have on flood risk. 5.
Therefore, clarification on this point should be provided by the applicant to enable the Council to be satisfied that this matter should not be the subject of a separate refusal ground. In terms of the suitability of other sites for affordable housing in the Parish, the applicant makes reference to a walkabout in the Parish on 23 September 2009 where other alternative sites were considered. However, no substantial further details are provided in relation to these sites or their suitability for accommodating housing development. Therefore, the Council cannot be satisfied by the applicant s submissions that a more suitable site within the Parish does not exist. It is hard to imagine that alternative available sites would be more harmful to Green Belt openness, the character of the AONB and the Conservation Area compared to Forge Field. The application is clearly contrary to defined policies that seek to protect openness and no very special circumstances exist that outweigh the identified harm that would occur. Taking this into consideration and the harm that would occur to the historic fabric of the village, it is respectfully requested for permission to be refused on the grounds cited above. The Council s refusal grounds should be numerous and as robust as possible. Yours sincerely 6.