Four dwellings at Thanet District Council Depot Pierremont Park, Broadstairs

What was proposed

An outline application proposed three three-bedroom dwellings and one single-storey two-bedroom dwelling after demolishing the existing buildings.

“LOCATION: Outline application for the erection of 3no. 3-storey 3-bed dwellings and 1No single storey 2-bed dwelling, following the demolition of the existing buildings, with consideration of access, layout and scale, and all other matters reserved…”

Officer report

The site and its surroundings

The site is previously developed council depot and nursery land in a corner of the park, with an existing access and nearby homes.

“The site is located within a corner of Pierremont Park, with Pieremont Hall, a Grade II Listed building, located to the east of the site. The site does not lie within the Conservation Area, and whilst there are a number of trees within the site, none of them are protected by a Tree Preservation Order.”

“The site consists of previously developed land that has previously been used as a council depot and horticultural nursery. There are a number of existing buildings on site that are single storey in height and have been used for storage and in association with the former uses. There is an existing vehicular access to the site from Pierremont Avenue.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval through deferment and delegation, subject to transferring the SPA contribution and imposing safeguarding conditions.

“Thanet District Council produced the Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Plan (SAMM) to deal with these matters, which focuses on the impacts of recreational activities on the Thanet section of the Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay Special Protection Area (SPA). The studies indicate that recreational disturbance is a potential cause of the decline in bird numbers in the SPA.”

“It is therefore recommended that members defer and delegate the application to officers for approve, subject to the transfer of the SPA financial contribution, and safeguarding conditions.”

Officer report

Objections and support

Thirty-one objections raised concerns about access, parking, character, trees, wildlife, privacy, traffic, drainage and community use, while Thanet CPRE supported the outline proposal.

“Site lies within green space and open space designations, • Unsafe access, conflict with pedestrians, • Lack of parking, including visitor spaces, • Residential use will change the character of the area, • Could the area be used for an alternate use by Broadstairs and St.Peters Town Council? • Require clarity on the design and whether its being applied for, • Loss of trees and hedgerow, • Building within a park seems unnecessary, • plans incorrect in terms of referencing…”

“Thanet CPRE (Campaign for Rural England) - Thanet CPRE is in two minds about this proposal. On the one hand, the use of a brownfield site is in accordance with the Government's desire to utilise brownfield sites for housing development but on the other, the land could have been put to additional parkland use. On balance, Thanet CPRE supports the proposal as it is an outline application but would welcome the chance to see the details in due course.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in favour, an objector spoke against, and a councillor spoke under the council’s procedure rules before leaving.

What members debated

A member sought legal advice about whether the decision process could address a separate site-disposal matter, but officers said it could not be considered.

“A member of the committee requested that a request be forwarded to the Monitoring Officer for legal advice on whether the decision making process for this application was correct as there were two aspects to this application, one of which was not a planning application matter. This non planning consideration related to the disposal of the site.”

“Iain Livingstone, Planning Applications Manager said that the committee could not consider the non-planning matter in making a decision on this application. This view was also confirmed by the clerk.”

Minutes

The votes

The proposed approval motion was lost, then members agreed to defer the application for officers to provide potential refusal reasons and return it to committee.

“8.44pm: The Chair adjourned the meeting to enable the committee to draft the wording for the reasons for refusal.”

“Defer to officers to provide potential reasons for refusal following the debate and bring back to planning committee for decision, including comment from the Council’s Monitoring officer on the decision making process.”

Minutes