Report for Item 6 - Swale Borough Council

2.2 (Contd) PART 2
Reasons for Approval
Having taken all material considerations into account, it is considered that, subject to
compliance with the attached conditions, the proposal would be in accordance with
the development plan and would not cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of
the area or prejudice highway safety. In resolving to grant permission, particular
regard has been had to the following policies: E1, E19, E21, H2 and T3 of The Swale
Borough Local Plan 2008
Description of Proposal
The application is essentially a renewal of the planning permission approved under
reference SW/07/0058 for the demolition of 26 existing garage units currently on site
and for the erection of 2 two bedroom (wheelchair accessible) semi-detached
bungalows and associated parking; plus an additional 22 (non allocated) parking
spaces for local residents.
Relevant Site History and Description
The site is located in Ennerdale, within a large housing estate in Faversham. The
site is within Faversham’s built up area boundary where the principle of new houses
is acceptable. There are 26 garages currently on site, which appear to be in various
states of poor repair.
An application for 3 two bed terraced houses and 2 two bed semi detached
bungalow units was withdrawn in 2006.
SW/07/0058 for the proposed demolition of existing garages and redevelopment of
the site to provide 2 two bed (wheelchair accessible) semi-detached bungalows and
associated parking plus 22 additional (non allocated) parking spaces for local
residents was approved in May 2007 after taking into account details of garage
usage and local parking capacity.
Views of Consultees
Faversham Town Council recommend approval of the application subject to works
commencing within one year to ensure that the site, which is at present used for
tipping rubbish, is tidied up as soon as possible.
Kent Highway Services raise no objections to the proposal.
Other Representations
The application was first received on 13 April 2010. Local notification unfortunately
referred to the original description of the earlier 2006 application (3 houses and 2
bungalows) and seven letters of objection were received. When the error was
noticed, local residents were re-consulted on 2 June 2010 and 3 further letters of
objection have since been received. Relevant issues raised cover the following
summarised concerns: Continued . . .
13