sw/08/0902 (3.4) - the limeworks, faversham road, norton, faversham

PRESENT: Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman, Chairman for this meeting), Councillors Adrian Crowther, Duncan Dewar-Whalley, David Garside, Mike Henderson, Elvina Lowe, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Ghlin Whelan.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Peter Bell, Philippa Davies, Heather Murton and Graham Thomas.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mr Harpa (Applicant), Messrs Bannister and Cotton (Architects), Parish Councillor Trim (Norton Parish Council), Mr and Mrs Speed (Local residents).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Bobbin and Sue Gent.

sw/08/0949 (2.12) - crown hill cottage, perry wood, selling

PRESENT: Councillor Prescott (Vice-Chairman, Chairman for this meeting), Councillor Barnicott (Chairman), Councillors Adrian Crowther, Duncan Dewar-Whalley, David Garside, Elvina Lowe, Pat Sandle, Ben Stokes, Roger Truelove and Ghlin Whelan.

OFFICERS PRESENT: Peter Bell, Philippa Davies, Claire Dethier and Graham Thomas.

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Councillor Bowles (Ward Councillor), Miss Banks and Mr Minter (Agents), Mr and Mrs Wood (Applicants), Parish Councillors J and P Duncan, Holdstock and Smart, Mr Bennthal, Mrs Edwards, Mr Higgs, Mr Reed, Ms Squires and Mr Smith (Local Residents).

APOLOGIES: Councillors Bobbin and Sue Gent.

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

part b minutes for information

sw/08/0902 (3.4) - the limeworks, faversham road, norton, faversham

The Planning Officer explained that the application was for a new site entrance, driveway and car port at the Limeworks which was being converted for residential use. She explained that the existing entrance was used by both local residents and the pumping station. The new driveway would be 200 metres long and run 30 metres in and parallel to Faversham Road. The entrance would be flanked by blue balustrade fencing and blue metal gates and the chestnut fencing would be retained along the remainder of the boundary. A new car port would be built into the bank and would face Faversham Road. The Planning Officer explained that any surface water would be directed to a new wildlife pond. She outlined the history of the site and explained that the Limeworks became a listed building in 2007 and explained that the application was within the countryside and would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area. She explained that the site was contained at the moment and that the proposed driveway would break up the line of the field and the blue fence and industrial gates would make the entrance very visible. She did not consider the observation that the new access to the site could be safer than the existing access, which was near a bend in the road, to be justification for this application. The Planning Officer concluded that the application had been submitted following South East Water's request to fence off their site to make it more secure.

Mr Bannister, the Architect, considered there was no persuasive reason in the report submitted to the Planning Committee which defined how the proposal was unacceptable. He explained that the application had been supported by the Parish Council and South East Water and he considered the new entrance would be safer and more appropriate than the existing entrance and that the application would enhance the setting of the listed building.

A representative from Norton Parish Council reported that the Parish Council had considered the application with regard to the whole site and considered a tasteful and sympathetic access was required. He suggested that the routing of the proposed driveway minimalised visual impact. He considered the proposed restoration of the pond was beneficial to the surrounding area.

Mrs Speed, a local resident, explained that she had lived nearby for many years and that there had previously been problems with access and security and the gates had been locked, which had been impractical. The modernised building had attracted many visitors to the site and people were unaware that the land was private which raised security issues. She considered that if the waterworks was fenced off, the building would be more secure and the fencing and gate proposed were similar to what had been there in the past.

In response to a question, Mr Bannister explained that the line of the proposed driveway would be positioned on a crest in the field which would assist it not being visible from Faversham Road. The Applicant advised that the shade of blue to be used on the fence was similar to the colour already used on the existing fences. He also advised that ideally only one tree would need to be removed at the point where the new driveway joined the existing route to the Limeworks.

In response to a question regarding the car port, the architect confirmed that this would be within the building's curtilage, carved into the landscape and positioned so that the cars are away from the building. He advised that foliage and landscaping should reduce the visual impact of the car port. He confirmed that the line of trees surrounding the limeworks would be retained.

The Conservation Officer congratulated the architect on the work that had already been done. He considered it was a special site and the building was a dramatic contrast against the landscape which would be reduced if its curtilage extended into the field. He advised that the trees were not protected and thinning them could allow the drama to be more noticeable.

A Member suggested it could be beneficial to use block paving, which allowed grass to grow in between, on the driveway.

Members then toured the site and asked the Planning Officer and the Conservation Officer questions which they answered.

sw/08/0949 (2.12) - crown hill cottage, perry wood, selling

The Planning Officer explained that the application was for the demolition of the existing 300 year old dwelling to be replaced with a two storey house and a detached garage. She reported that English Heritage was looking into whether a request for the existing dwelling to be listed should be agreed. She explained that it was hoped that a reply would have been received in time for the Planning Committee meeting on 4th December 2008. If the house was listed, the applicants would proceed with the application for the detached garage.

The Planning Officer outlined the materials that would be used on the new building. It would be timber-framed and use reclaimed bricks and Kent peg tiles. The house would be a modern form of a Kent Hall House. A previous application had been refused early in 2008 as the footprint had been too large.

The Planning Officer reported that the Campaign to Protect Rural England and Selling Parish Council were against the proposal. Nine letters of objection had been received which included the following points: did not want the house to be demolished; scale was too large; it was out of keeping with the surrounding area; it should be renovated instead; it was in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and loss of buildings.

The Agent confirmed that the property was being considered as a listed building by the DCMS (please write in full). He advised that if the house was listed, the applicants would repair, refurbish and extend it and withdraw their request for its demolition.

A Ward Councillor welcomed the site visit and considered that the cottage was historically important and a valuable part of the streetscene, within the ancient woodland. He stated that the proposed dwelling was too large for the site.

A representative from Selling Parish Council advised that the application had raised a lot of feeling and emotion within the area. He considered that the increase in footprint was not modest and that the proposal was out of keeping with the area.

Local residents made the following comments: the house should be renovated and not demolished; it was an integral part of the area; it is an historic building; a precedent could be set; it is part of the local history and community; if it is replaced, it should be with a similar woodland cottage; there are no double garages in Perry Wood; loss of hedges; a lot of cottages are close to the road in Perry Wood; the local heritage needed to be protected; the cottage is valuable and rare; it is an unusual house and not many lower class houses are listed.

Members then toured the site and asked the Planning Officer and the Conservation Officer questions which they answered.