Two-bedroom dwelling at Copplestone, Barn End Lane, Wilmington

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing existing stores and building a two-bedroom dwelling with altered ground levels, a new access and parking.

“Proposal: Demolition of the existing stores and erection of a new dwelling with alteration to existing ground levels to rear garden and new vehicle access with associated parking area…”

“(6) The new dwelling is proposed to be two storey with a height of 5.3m to the eaves and 7.7m to the ridge height with a gable roof design. The finishing materials would consist of a combination of both brick and render to the elevations with a tiled roof. The proposed roof will include PV panels within the rear roof slope. Off street parking for two vehicles is proposed to the front of the new property. This will use a new vehicular access onto Whitehead Close.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

Copplestone is a detached property on a large corner plot, with existing stores, hardstanding and surrounding detached homes of varied scale.

“(1) Copplestone is detached property within a large corner plot on the southeastern corner of Whitehead Close and Barn End Lane. The property has two detached garages (referred to as ‘stores’) with hardstanding to the front accessed from Whitehead Close. The hardstanding provides space for 3-4 cars.”

“(3) The property is bounded by a detached property fronting Barn End Lane to the south and to the east a detached property fronting Whitehead Close and the rear garden of a property fronting Rowlatt Road. The property to the south is similar in terms of bulk/scale but the properties in Whitehead Close are a mixture of two storey dwellings but also some one and a half storey dwellings of similar scale to the application site.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier permissions included a rear extension, a detached garage, a rear extension, a two-storey front extension and older bungalow and garage approvals.

“(10) 24/00869/FUL - Erection of a single storey rear extension. Approved 30th August 2024 - does not appear to have been implemented.”

“(13) 18/00293/FUL - Erection of a two storey front extension with dormer window in side elevation, enlarged existing dormers in front and rear elevations and change of part pitched/part gable roof to gable roof and provision of a patio. Approved24th May 2018 and implemented.”

Officer report

The officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the site was reasonably sustainable and the benefits of a new dwelling outweighed its disbenefits.

“(25) Policy S5 in relation to small site windfall/unplanned development states that development will be supported where benefits outweigh the disbenefits including the sustainability of the site's location. The sustainability of the site's location is determined via two key factors, that is; its classification in terms of whether it is greenfield or brownfield land and its accessibility in relation to public transport links, shops, services and community facilities.”

“(29) Taking these points into consideration, the new dwelling would not be within a highly sustainable location, however as there are some facilities and amenities in close proximity and a bus service, the location of this new dwelling is considered reasonably sustainable.”

Officer report

Main planning effects

The assessment found no unacceptable harm to character, neighbours, accommodation, parking or highway safety, with conditions addressing privacy and access.

“(33) Policy M10 seeks to ensure that development on garden land does not result in; harm to the diversity of housing stock in the borough, erosion of local character; significant loss of residential garden land. It further outlines that development should not harm residential amenity by loss of privacy, loss of sunlight or increased on street parking, provide safe access, preserve the historical pattern and form of development in the area, among other considerations.”

“(47) Pedestrian visibility splays of 2m x 2m are shown on the proposed plans and this is considered to be acceptable. Highway visibility splays for the new access onto Whitehead Close are not shown on the proposed plans but as this road is a residential street with no through route, cars travel at a relatively slow speed. I have reviewed the details of the access with Kent Highways and they are content that suitable visibility would be achieved to the west.”

Officer report

Organisations’ comments

Kent Fire Brigade was satisfied with emergency access, Environmental Health requested construction controls, and Wilmington Parish Council did not comment.

“(16) Kent Fire Brigade (KFB) are satisfied that the emergency access requirements appear to be met at this stage, subject to a building regulations consultation.”

“(18) Wilmington Parish Council have not commented.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Twenty representations from 18 neighbouring properties raised concerns about design, dominance, privacy, safety, parking, precedent, biodiversity and openness.

“(19) There have been 20 representations submitted which were received from 18 separate neighbouring properties. A summary of the concerns is set out below:”

“Whitehead Close is already overly busy with parked cars and pedestrian schoolchildren awaiting collection safety concerns should the dropped kerb be provided. • Precedent and cumulative impacts - The new dwelling would establish a harmful precedent encouraging further infill development on private garages and plots in the immediate area. • The proposal would erode the open and spacious character which policy seeks to preserve • Inappropriate development in a rural area.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Major Projects Team Leader outlined the application and drew members’ attention to the update and further representation.

The committee vote

Members unanimously supported the officer recommendation, and the application was approved without debate.

“Members indicated their unanimous support for the Officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission and so the application was approved without debate.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to the report’s conditions and an amended condition identifying the revised approved plans.

“To grant planning permission subject to conditions in the agenda report and amended condition 2 as set out in the update report:”

“The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documents: SM374.1; SM374.2 rev A; SM374.3”

Minutes