site allocations development plan document proposed ... · 1 site allocations development plan...

1

SITE ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT

PROPOSED SUBMISSION DOCUMENT (DRAFT)

Appendix 1

Schedule of Main Amendments

The tables in the following pages summarise the main amendments to the Consultation Draft Site Allocations DPD forming the new Submission Draft Site Allocations DPD.

Where paragraph numbers are referred to in the schedule, they are paragraphs in the Submission Draft DPD and not the 2013 Consultation Draft DPD.

Where policy numbers are referred to in the schedule, they are policy numbers in the Submission Draft DPD and not the 2013 Consultation Draft DPD. (There have been a number of amendments to policy numbers, particularly in the Royal Tunbridge Wells and Southborough chapter, as some policies have been deleted and others rearranged in order.)

The schedule is arranged as follows:

Table A - Minor Amendments Throughout the DPD

Table B - Foreword and How to Get Involved

Table C - Chapter 1: Introduction

Table D - Chapter 2: Methodology and Strategy

Table E - Chapter 3: Royal Tunbridge Wells and Southborough

Table F - Chapter 4: Green Belt and Rural Fringe

Table G - Chapter 5: Paddock Wood

Table H - Chapter 6: Cranbrook

Table I - Chapter 7: Hawkhurst (Highgate), The Moor and Gill’s Green

Table J - Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas

2

Minor Amendments Throughout the DPD

Table A – Minor Amendments Throughout the DPD

Para / Policy Proposed Amendment(s) Comments PPWG recommendation

Text and policies throughout the DPD

References to ‘proposed’ policies The Consultation Draft Site Allocations DPD contained proposed policies for comment. The policies and accompanying text therefore contained wording such as “It is proposed that this site … is allocated for …” Given that the Submission Draft DPD contains the policies that the Council wishes to pursue to the next stage of plan preparation, these references have been deleted throughout the DPD.

PPWG agree to this amendment

Text and policies throughout the DPD

References to Development Management DPD

At the time of writing the Consultation Draft Site Allocations DPD, it was intended to produce a separate Development Management (DM) Policies DPD. Any DM policies that are still required will now be incorporated into the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan), so references to the DM Policies DPD have been deleted throughout the DPD.


Text throughout the DPD

References to ‘LDF’ and ‘Local Development Framework’

Government guidance has moved away from the term ‘Local Development Framework’ (LDF) to describe a suite of planning documents, instead using the term ‘Local Plan’. References to ‘LDF’ or ‘Local Development Framework’ have therefore been deleted and the term ‘Local Plan’ substituted where appropriate.



Sections at end of each settlement based chapter:

‘Car Parking’

‘Development Contributions’

‘Other Sites Considered’

The Consultation Draft Site Allocations DPD contained some repeated information at the end of each of the settlement chapters, as it was considered that the chapters might be read without reference to the Introduction or Methodology.

As the Submission DPD represents the version of the document that the Council wishes to submit for independent examination, and should be read as a whole, these sections have been deleted throughout the DPD.


Text and policies throughout the

Reference to site numbers in text and policies throughout the DPD

The purpose of the site numbers was to enable cross-referencing between the policies and assessments in the Site Templates. In


3

Table A – Minor Amendments Throughout the DPD


DPD some cases boundaries have changed or sites have been amalgamated into amended policy boundaries and so references to site numbers have been deleted throughout the DPD.

Policy text throughout DPD

Delete reference in policies to standard planning application requirements

Repetitious text in the policies - for example points requiring that Transport Assessments and Travel Plans are prepared or investigation for contamination is undertaken - has been removed, following further discussions with Development Management officers.

There are a number of standard requirements of the planning application process that would automatically be required for planning applications over a certain size and the removal of these will make the DPD more concise. Additional text has been added to the Introduction to emphasise that the DPD will operate within a wider context of national and local policy requirements.



General changes throughout the DPD

Where possible amendments have been made throughout the DPD to improve clarity and to delete unnecessary text to make the document more concise.


4

Foreword and How to Get Involved

Table B – Foreword and How to Get Involved


Foreword Introduction by the Portfolio Holder The Foreword set the context for the Consultation Draft DPD. This section will be updated with the Portfolio Holder prior to the next stage of consultation.


Invitation to Comment

Details of the forthcoming consultation on the Submission DPD

This section gave details of the 2013 consultation. It will be updated prior to the next stage of consultation, with information about public exhibitions and how to get involved, when these details are finalised.


5

Chapter 1: Introduction

Table C – Chapter 1: Introduction


About This Document

Paragraphs 1.1 – 1.5

Highlighted box

Amendments have been made to update the text in relation to the stage reached in preparing the DPD and the previous consultations that have been undertaken.

The highlighted box sets out the relationship between the Core Strategy and the Site Allocations DPD.

These are factual amendments to update the DPD and improve clarity.

The highlighted box is to stress that the purpose of the Site Allocations DPD is to identify sites for the remaining development requirements of the adopted Core Strategy. Any amendments to the development requirements for the Borough or the distribution of development between settlements will need to be made through the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan).


Structure of the Document


Minor amendments For clarity and concision PPWG agree to this amendment

Site Allocation Policies


Highlighted boxes

Amendments have been made to update the text in relation to the forthcoming consultation on the Submission document.

Amendments have been made to emphasise that the DPD policies will not be the only considerations when deciding planning applications and that other national and local policies will apply, as well as standard requirements.

Repetitious text in the DPD policies (for example points requiring that Transport Assessments and Travel Plans are prepared or investigation for contamination is undertaken) has been removed. There are a number of standard requirements of the planning application process that would automatically be required for planning applications over a certain size and the removal of these would make the DPD more concise. Additional text has been added to the Introduction to emphasise that the DPD will operate within a wider context of national and local policy requirements.


Policy Context Paragraphs 1.17-

Minor amendments For clarification and to highlight additional evidence (the Agricultural Land Classification Study).


6



1.20

National Planning Policy


Highlighted box

Minor amendments National legislation has introduced the term ‘key shopping areas’ – paragraph 1.23 states how it will be interpreted in Tunbridge Wells Borough.

Amendments to highlight that the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East (known as the South East Plan) has been revoked.


Local Planning Policy


Minor amendments For clarity and concision PPWG agree to this amendment

Evidence Base

Paragraph 1.31 and Table 2

Minor amendments

Changes add reference to studies completed since the 2013 Consultation Draft was published (e.g. Agricultural Land Classification, Retail and Leisure Study Update).


Infrastructure Requirements


Minor amendments For clarity PPWG agree to this amendment

Sustainability Appraisal



Habitat Regulations

Additional information Additional information about the Ashdown Forest has been added for clarity


7



Assessment – Appropriate Assessment


Monitoring


Table 3

Minor amendments To update the information PPWG agree to this amendment

8

Chapter 2: Methodology and Strategy

Table D – Chapter 2: Methodology and Strategy


Methodology to Site Selection


Amendments To emphasise that the Site Allocations DPD is a document that sits within the framework already established by the 2010 Core Strategy.


How sites have been assessed


Figure 1

Table 4

Additions have been made to clarify the methodology to site selection

Addition of new diagram – Figure 1

A number of consultation comments stated that the methodology underlying the selection of sites in the DPD was unclear. This section has been extensively rewritten to clarify the stages the Council has undertaken in producing the Submission DPD.

A new figure has been added to show the different stages.

Suggest highlight in green to emphasise key information.

Insert footnote defining SHLAA.

The Strategy for Tunbridge Wells Borough


Table 5

Amendments have been made to update the development requirements for Tunbridge Wells Borough and the main settlements

The Consultation Draft DPD was based on development figures current at 30 September 2012. The Submission DPD is based on figures current at 31 July 2014, so needs to meet development requirements from 1 August 2014 to the end of the Plan period at 31 March 2026. This has been reflected in extensive changes to this section.

Try to give context as amount of growth per settlement

Meeting the Borough’s Housing Needs


Table 6

Amendments have been made to update the development requirements for Tunbridge Wells Borough and the main settlements

The Consultation Draft DPD was based on development figures current at 30 September 2012. The Submission DPD is based on figures current at 31 July 2014.


Meeting the Additional paragraphs Paragraphs 2.23 – 2.24 have been added to the document to provide PPWG agree to this

9



Borough’s Employment Needs


information on employment land. amendment

Meeting the Borough’s Retail Needs


Amendments have been made to update the development requirements in relation to the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update

Additional paragraphs have been added and amendments have been made to reflect the new Retail and Leisure Study.


Strategic Policies

Metropolitan Green Belt


Amendments have been made to reflect that a review of the Green Belt is no longer proposed

The Consultation Draft DPD included proposals for a review of the Green Belt and defined ‘Areas of Search’ for replacement Rural Fringe. Following discussion at PPWG on 18 March 2014 it was agreed that these proposals will be deleted. Amendments have been made to this section and Chapter 4 to reflect this.


Defining the Limits to Built Development



Retail, Town and other defined Centres

Paragraph 2.37 – 2.39

Minor amendments Additions have been made for clarity.

National legislation has introduced the term ‘key shopping areas’ – this text states how it will be interpreted in Tunbridge Wells Borough. (See also paragraph 1.23 in Chapter 1: Introduction.)


Former Railway Lines

Minor amendments Minor amendments have been made to these paragraphs to improve clarity.


10




Infrastructure


Policy AL/STR 4: Infrastructure – Bewl Water Reservoir

Additions have been made to reflect amended Policy AL/STR4: Infrastructure - Bewl Water Reservoir

The policy on Bewl Water (formerly AL/VRA4) has been amended to reflect the fact that additional storage capacity will not be needed until 2030, after the end of the current plan period. It is also moved from Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas to Chapter 2: Methodology and Strategy. The new policy is numbered AL/STR4.


11

Chapter 3: Royal Tunbridge Wells and Southborough

Table 3 – Chapter 3: Royal Tunbridge Wells and Southborough

Para / Policy Proposed Change(s) Comments PPWG recommendation

Royal Tunbridge Wells

The Strategy for the Main Urban Area


Changes have been made to reflect that a review of the Green Belt is no longer proposed and for general clarification

The Consultation Draft DPD included proposals for a review of the Green Belt and defined Areas of Search for replacement Rural Fringe. The PPWG report on Green Belt and Rural Fringe (18 March 2014, Item 4) proposed that these be deleted from the DPD. Amendments have therefore been made to these paragraphs to reflect this.


Royal Tunbridge Wells


Minor amendments To improve clarity. PPWG agree to this amendment

Requirement of the Core Strategy


Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update and to reflect changes elsewhere in the Chapter

Some minor amendments have been made to these paragraphs to reflect that a Green Belt review is not necessary and to reflect the updated information in the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update.


Policy AL/RTW 1: Urban Design Framework

Minor amendment The term ‘Urban Design Framework’ has been added to the text of this policy for consistency with the policy title.


Housing Development

Paragraph 3.16

Changes have been made to update the development requirement for Royal Tunbridge Wells

The Consultation Draft DPD was based on development figures current at 30 September 2012. The Submission DPD is based on figures current at 31 July 2014. This is reflected in changes to this paragraph.

Add sentence to clarify that it is this 1409 dwellings which this document seeks to allocate

Retail Development

Paragraphs 3.17

Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update

Retail requirements in the Consultation Draft DPD were based on the 2011 Retail and Leisure Study. The Council commissioned a new Retail and Leisure Study, the findings of which would be reflected in the next stage of preparing the


12



– 3.22

Table 7

DPD. Changes have therefore been made to these paragraphs to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study.

Employment Development


Amendments To clarify the approach to employment development PPWG agree to this amendment

Public Parking Provision


Paragraphs 3.26 – 3.27 have been added to provide the context for parking provision within Royal Tunbridge Wells

A number of policies within Chapter 3 contain recommendations for the provision of parking. These were based on the findings of the 2011 Tunbridge Wells Urban Area Parking Study. A Parking Strategy is currently being drafted and paragraphs 3.26 – 3.27 have been drafted in liaison with the Council’s Parking Manager to provide a context for the approach being taken to parking provision within the main urban area.


Town Centre Policies


Amendments have been made to update text regarding the preparation of masterplans for the Areas of Change and to refer to the Cultural and Learning Hub.

To reflect changes made to the policies elsewhere in the Chapter and the latest proposals for the Cultural and Learning Hub.


Policy AL/RTW 2: Crescent Road / Church Road Area of Change

Policy has been divided into:

AL/RTW 2A: Town Hall, the ‘Civic Complex’

AL/RTW 2B: former Cinema Site and surrounding area

To reflect the physical separation of these two areas and allow for the areas to be developed to separate timescales.


Policy AL/RTW 2: Crescent Road / Church Road

Reference to the Council initiating masterplans for the sites has been deleted and text added stating that the Local Planning Authority will expect a

To facilitate collaborative working between the Council, local groups and developers of major sites within the urban area and provide flexibility for the different circumstances of each Area


13



Area of Change masterplan to be prepared by the developer(s) through collaborative working with the local community and the Borough Council to guide development proposals for the areas.

of Change.

Policy AL/RTW 2A: Civic Complex

Reference has been added to a Cultural and Learning Hub as part of the civic, educational, cultural and leisure uses

To reflect the latest proposals PPWG agree to this amendment

Policies AL/RTW 2A: Civic Complex and 2B: Cinema Site

Amendments have been made to retail requirements to:

Change from gross figures to net

Take account of the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update

The Retail Study 2014 targets are expressed as net figures. The Study uses a gross: net ratio of 70:30. For ease of comparison it is proposed that retail requirements in policies are also expressed as net.

Policy AL/RTW2 (both areas) allocated 34,000sqm (gross) additional comparison retail floorspace. This equates to 23,800sqm (net).

It is proposed to allocate approximately 3,500sqm (net) to Area 2B (former Cinema Site and surrounding area); this equates to the level of retail space previously approved by application 08/03119 (now expired).

It is proposed to allocate the balance, approximately (stated in the policy as “at least”) 15,000sqm (net) to Area 2A (Civic Complex).

It is noted that the allocations to areas 2A (15,000sqm) and 2B (3,500sqm) together create less than 23,800sqm (net). This is to provide flexibility for development proposals that will also include associated A3/4/5 uses; the precise breakdown between A1 uses and these uses will be finalised through the Masterplan process.


Policy AL/RTW Restaurants and Cafes: text has been To reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update. PPWG agree to this

14



2A: Civic Complex

included stating that development shall provide an increased level of restaurant and café facilities as part of the proposed mix of development.

amendment

Policy AL/RTW 2A: Civic Complex

Amendments to parking to:

Delete reference to 2011 Urban Area Parking Strategy and refer to “the Council’s most recent” study of parking requirements.

State that there should be no net loss of public car parking spaces within the Area of Change rather than the town centre.

Following discussions with the Parking Manager, these amendments are to provide flexibility for development proposals while also ensuring that the level of public parking provision within the Area of Change reflects the latest evidence based studies and Council Parking Strategy.



Transport improvements: a requirement has been added for transport improvements to specified junctions for Areas 2A and 2B.

To reflect discussions with Kent County Council Highways officers.



Employment uses: a change has been made to specify ‘B1 office’ space

To ensure employment uses provide office space. PPWG agree to this amendment


An addition has been made to state that proposals for development of part of the Area of Change should not compromise the overall aims of Policy AL/RTW2 and wider Core Strategy objectives

To reflect that the Area of Change contains a number of sites in different ownerships that may come forward for proposals for redevelopment at different times.


Policy AL/RTW 3: Vale Avenue Area of Change

Amend the site boundaries of the Area of Change to include the road between Morrisons and the Station (the Station

Including these additional areas within the wider Areas of Change Policy will ensure that proposals for improvements to the Public Realm and proposals for improving pedestrian


15



Approach road), part of Vale Road adjacent to Morrisons and the pedestrian access from the station to Mount Pleasant Road (via steps) to the north of the station.

access both into and within the site will cover the areas that require realignment and/or traffic calming.


Reference to the Council initiating masterplans for the sites has been deleted and text added stating that the Local Planning Authority will expect a masterplan to be prepared by the developer(s) through collaborative working with the local community and the Borough Council to guide development proposals for the areas.

To facilitate collaborative working between the Council, local groups and developers of major sites within the urban area and provide flexibility for the different circumstances of each Area of Change.



Employment use: no net loss of “employment space” has been changed to no net loss of “employment provision”

The policy currently requires that proposals do not result in a net loss of “employment space”. Using the wording “provision” allows more flexibility whilst ensuring that this site continues to provide a mix of uses that focus on providing employment opportunities.



Parking: amended to state that the existing public car parking spaces will be maintained and additional provision made to serve new uses.

Torrington car park currently provides 399 public parking spaces; this includes any empty spaces within the area set aside for station users after 10.30am and all weekend.

Following discussions with the Parking Manager, officers have been advised that capacity at Torrington car park is generally sufficient to meet demand except perhaps for a short period over Christmas. Amendments to the policy would maintain existing provision, provide for new uses, but also allow opportunities to provide more public car parking spaces to be explored.


Policy AL/RTW 3: Transport improvements: a requirement Following further discussions from Kent County Council PPWG agree to this

16



Vale Avenue Area of Change

for transport improvements to specified junctions has been added

A requirement that “Servicing of the site (for all uses) shall be from London Road” has been added

Highways officers and Borough Council Development Management officers.

amendment

Policy AL/RTW 3 Vale Avenue Area of Change

Residential use: residential capacity of the Area of Change has been increased from 100 to approximately 250 dwellings.

To reflect further discussions and feasibility assessment work on the Area of Change.



Addition to state that office (B1) use would be considered as an acceptable

alternative to residential use.

To retain flexibility. PPWG agree to this amendment


Public realm: reference has been added to the railway station frontage and southern end of Mount Pleasant.

Following discussions with Urban Design and Development Management officers, to provide more guidance for developers and to increase the scope for possible public realm improvements.



Wording related to railway station and Grove Hill Road car parks has been added

For clarity PPWG agree to this amendment


Addition to state that proposals for development of part of the Area of Change should not compromise the wider aims and comprehensive redevelopment of Policy AL/RTW 3 and wider Core Strategy objectives.

To reflect the number of sites in different ownerships within the Area of Change that may come forward for redevelopment at different times.



New paragraphs have been added regarding:

Access to the existing sewerage infrastructure

Following consultation comments PPWG agree to this amendment

17



Transport Assessment and Travel Plan

Policy AL/RTW 4: Eridge Road Area of Change

Reference to the Council initiating masterplans for the sites has been deleted and text added stating that the Local Planning Authority will expect a masterplan to be prepared by developer(s) through collaborative working with the local community and the Borough Council to guide development proposals for the areas.

To facilitate collaborative working between the Council, local groups and developers of major sites within the urban area and provide flexibility for the different circumstances of each Area of Change.



Employment use: reference to B1 office use has been added. Requirement for no net loss of employment space within the Area of Change, unless alternative provision is made has been deleted.

Recent discussions with potential developers of Union House indicate that it would be unviable to reprovide the existing amount of employment space. The proposed revisions reflect this whilst still aiming to provide some employment uses within the Area of Change.



Retail: reference has been added to retail floorspace being provided “in the areas closest to the Pantiles”

To provide more clarity and reflect that retail development in the western part of the Area of Change is unlikely to be viable or attractive to retailers.



Parking: requirement has been amended to state that redevelopment should reprovide existing levels of public car parking provision and any increase in parking should reflect the latest evidence.

Following discussions with the Parking Manager. These amendments are to provide flexibility for development proposals while also ensuring that the level of public parking provision within the Area of Change reflects the latest evidence-based studies and Council Parking Strategy.



Transport improvements: reference to specific capacity improvements has been added

Following further discussions with Kent County Council Highways officers.


18




Residential use: development capacity of approximately 160 dwellings has been added. Reference to opportunities for development along the northern boundary of Linden Park Road, taking account of constraints has been added.

To reflect further discussions and feasibility assessment work on the Area of Change.



Leisure uses: amendment has been made to specify “health and fitness” uses.

To provide additional flexibility. Amend to read “a spa hotel” to avoid confusion.


Public realm: reference has been added to specific routes, including the West Station/ Sainsbury’s and Homebase area. Requirement for development to “create active frontages along the pedestrian routes” has been added




Addition: requirement that proposals for development of part of the Area of Change should not compromise the wider aims and comprehensive redevelopment of Policy AL/RTW 4 and wider Core Strategy objectives has been added

To reflect the number of sites in different ownerships within the Area of Change that may come forward for redevelopment at different times.


Paragraph 3.42 Reference to the need to ensure future access to the existing sewerage infrastructure for maintenance and improvement has been added

Additional information provided for clarity. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 5: 36-46 St Johns Road

Capacity of policy has been reduced from 70 to 65 dwellings

To reflect revisions made to feasibility assessment following discussions with Urban Design and Development Management officers.


19




First bullet requiring alternative accommodation to be provided for the Bus Depot and other occupiers has been deleted

Development Management officers have advised that this requirement would be very difficult to implement and enforce.



Reference to vehicular access being provided from Woodbury Park Road has been deleted

Proposals will need to be informed by discussions with the Highways Authority and the preparation of a Transport Assessment that will consider access into and out of the site.



Requirement that proposals shall retain and incorporate potential Local Heritage Assets (36 and 46 St Johns Road) has been deleted.

Following further discussions with Development Management officers, it is not proposed to identify specific buildings as being potential heritage assets: this could create pressure for their demolition in advance of any redevelopment and it is considered that Local Heritage Assets should be identified through detailed site discussions informed by the local community and interest groups.



Requirement to explore green infrastructure links from the site to Woodbury Park Cemetery has been added

Following consultation comments. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 6: Former Plant and Tool Hire, Eridge Road

Development capacity has been amended to 37-60 dwellings.

Planning application 12/00277 for 37 residential units was allowed on appeal in April 2013. The 37 dwellings are included within the five year supply.

PPWG agree to this amendment.

PPWG noted Development not started

Policy AL/RTW 6: Former Plant and Tool Hire, Eridge Road

Floodplain: amendments have been made to state that areas of the site that lie within the functional floodplain shall “comprise non-habitable floorspace at current ground level.”

Following further discussions with Development Management officers, to add clarity.


20



Paragraph 3.43 New paragraph: reference to permission 12/00277 and to access to the existing sewerage infrastructure has been added

For information and following consultation comments PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 7: Homeopathic Hospital, Church Road

Amended to state that proposals should be for residential “conversion” rather than “development.”

To emphasise that proposals should be explored for conversion rather than demolition and redevelopment.


Consider building as a local heritage asset, would like to retain but accept not appropriate to state in policy

Policy AL/RTW 7: Homeopathic Hospital, Church Road

The importance of retaining the open area to the west of the site adjacent to London Road fronting onto the Common has been highlighted within the policy

Following consultation comments. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 9: Lifestyle Motor Europe, Langton Road

Amendments have been made to:

Remove Tunbridge Wells Golf Club from site allocation

Reduce development capacity to reflect allocation of Lifestyle Motor Europe site only, for approximately 15 dwellings

It is no longer proposed to allocate the area used by the Golf Club.

The Golf Club is mostly within the Green Belt. A review of Green Belt boundaries around Royal Tunbridge Wells / Southborough may be undertaken as part of the Core Strategy Review.

Additional sites to the west of the Golf Club, located further into the Green Belt, have recently been submitted for consideration. If necessary, following an assessment of development need and capacity as part of the Core Strategy Review, a more comprehensive assessment of the redevelopment potential of these new sites together, with the Golf Club, can be carried out as part of a Green Belt Review.

Developing the Lifestyle Motor Europe site will not compromise the development potential of the adjacent Golf Clubhouse and


21



car park.

Policy AL/RTW 10: Former Gas Works, Sandhurst Road

A requirement that “a financial contribution shall be made to off site provision of equipment and play space at Oak Road Play Area” has been added

Following advice from Development Management officers, to provide certainty and secure additional benefit from redevelopment of the site.


Deleted policy: Land at West Station Coach Park, Linden Park Road

The 2013 Site Allocations DPD included Policy AL/RTW 11: Land at West Station Coach Park, Linden Park Road. This policy has now been deleted.

Economic Development officers have confirmed that Network Rail consider that the land at West Station Coach Park should be retained in its current undeveloped state. Additionally, the coach park is used regularly by visitors to the town and it has so far not been possible to identify a suitable alternative location for coach drop off/pick up. Network Rail is currently working on a feasibility study exploring the potential to reopen the disused Eridge railway line and the issue is being considered as part of the Long Term Planning Process for the Sussex rail network. While the original policy required development not to prejudice the reopening of the line, in light of early discussions about the project, it is proposed that the policy is deleted. When more detailed proposals are agreed it may be possible to reconsider the site as part of the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan).


Policy AL/RTW 11: Land at Goods Station Road


Delete reference to Meadow Road/Belgrave Road/Tunnel Road to reflect parts of the area likely to be available during the Plan period.

Reduce the residential capacity to approximately 30 dwellings to reflect reduced site area.

Estimated capacity after reducing down the site area to include only those parts that are likely to become available for redevelopment during the Plan period.


22




Requirement has been deleted: “Proposals shall demonstrate that existing community and employment uses within the areas proposed for redevelopment can be accommodated within the site, or that suitable alternative provision will be made”




Requirement has been deleted: “Proposals for redevelopment of part of the site shall not prejudice the eventual development of the whole allocation”

Given that the site area has been reduced (see above), it is likely that the reduced site would be developed in its entirety and therefore this requirement is no longer necessary.



Addition to state: “proposals for redevelopment shall seek to retain the existing Victorian warehouse building.”

To reflect the existing buildings on the site. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 12: Land at Quarry Road

Addition to state “if practicable” access shall be provided from Medway Road, with additional pedestrian access from Stanley Road.

Further investigation may be needed to assess whether the topography of the site would permit this access.


Policy AL/RTW 13: Tunbridge Wells Telephone Engineering Centre and WA Turner Factory, Broadwater Lane

Development capacity has been amended to 170 dwellings (from 189 dwellings).

Following further feasibility work by the Council’s Urban Designer.


Policy AL/RTW 13: Tunbridge

An addition has been made to state that the site currently occupied by the WA

To reflect previous development proposals for the site. PPWG agree to this amendment

23



Wells Telephone Engineering Centre and WA Turner Factory, Broadwater Lane

Turner factory may also be considered suitable for redevelopment for a mix of general and retirement housing.


A requirement has been added for the preparation of a masterplan and collaborative working with local businesses, the local community and the Borough Council.

To recognise the likelihood that the site may be developed at different stages by the different landowners.



Requirement that proposals involving the loss of employment uses shall demonstrate that suitable alternative provision will be made has been deleted



Policy AL/RTW 14: Land at Medway Road (East)

Capacity has been increased from 8 to 20 dwellings

The site area is increased to include undeveloped land at corner of Quarry Road and Grosvenor Bridge and the capacity has been amended following further feasibility work by the Council’s Urban Designer.


Policy AL/RTW 15: 123-129 Silverdale Road

Estimated quantity of development has been reduced to approximately 15 dwellings

Estimated capacity amended after reducing down the site area to include only those parts that are likely to become available for redevelopment during the Plan period.


Policy AL/RTW 16: Land at

Addition has been made to state that proposals for accommodation for

To reflect pre-application discussions regarding the site. PPWG agree to this

24



Beechwood Sacred Heart

retirement housing would also be considered

amendment

Policy AL/RTW 17: Former Builders’ Yard, Goods Station Road

Capacity has been increased from 8 to “approximately 10 dwellings”

To reflect planning permission 13/00147. PPWG agree to this amendment

Former Policy AL/RTW 16: Land at Medway Road (East)

Former Policy AL/RTW 16 contained six allocations. This policy has been deleted and the site allocations treated as follows:

Land at Medway Road (East) – this is now dealt with in separate policy AL/RTW 14

123-129 Silverdale Road – this is now dealt with in separate policy AL/RTW 15

Land at Beechwood Sacred Heart – this is now dealt with in separate policy AL/RTW 16

Land at Bayhall Road/Forest Road, Hawkenbury - 2 dwellings are currently under construction so this allocation has been deleted

Land at Culverden Park/Culverden Park Road - given that construction has begun on the Kent & Sussex Hospital site, this allocation has been deleted (as with former Policy AL/RTW 24)

Former Builders’ Yard, Goods Station Road - this is now dealt with in separate policy AL/RTW 17


Policy AL/RTW 18: Land at Unigate Dairy, St Johns Road


Reduce site area to include Unigate Dairy only.

Reduce development capacity to refer to Dairy Site only, from 53 to 31 dwellings

Dairy Crest continues to operate from the depot although recent discussions with them have indicated that they propose to relocate to a smaller site within Tunbridge Wells. Freeway Exhaust and Tyre Company site may not be available until after the end of the Plan period.


Policy AL/RTW 18: Land at Unigate Dairy, St

The following requirements have been deleted:

Following discussions with Development Management officers. Policy points would be standard requirements of any planning application. It is not proposed to identify specific buildings as


25



Johns Road

Development shall provide a frontage onto St Johns Road

Development shall retain and reuse potential Local Heritage Assets (Nos. 83-85 St Johns Road and the main dairy building)

Green infrastructure shall be provided, and pedestrian and cycle routes through the site

being potential heritage assets in the policy: this could create pressure for their demolition in advance of any redevelopment and it is considered that Local Heritage Assets should be identified through detailed site discussions informed by the local community and interest groups.

Retail Development

Paragraphs 3.45

Amendments have been made to refer to updated requirements in 2014 Retail and Leisure Study.

To reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study requirements PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 19: Land at Royal Victoria Place

Amendments have been made to specify retail requirements as net figures rather than gross - an additional 13,000sqm (net) of comparison retail floorspace.

This policy previously included a requirement for 19,000sqm (gross). Given that the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study requirements are expressed as net figures, it is proposed to use net figures in policies to aid clarity. (The Study uses a gross: net ratio of 70:30.)



Requirement that “existing community uses shall be retained on-site, unless suitable alternative provision is made within the Town Centre” has been deleted




Addition states that: “opportunities shall be explored for infilling and redevelopment of the Food Hall, Market Square, Ely Court and Calverley Row”

Following discussions with Development Management officers, to make efficient use of the site.


26




Amendment has been made to state that: “development shall contribute to improvements to the road junctions within the immediate area, including the enhancement of the Calverley Road/Camden Road junction and to other traffic or sustainable transport measures”

Following further discussions with Kent County Council Highways officers.



Addition has been made to state that: “major public realm improvements shall be delivered at the junction of Calverley Road with Monson Road.”




Addition has been made to state that: “provide public art, which may include water features, within the redevelopment.”



Policy AL/RTW 20: 77 Mount Ephraim (Sturge House, Brockborne House)

The allocation has been expanded to encompass 77 Mount Ephraim (Sturge House, Brockborne House). Reference to Neville House has been deleted.

Given losses of employment land elsewhere, it is proposed to expand the area of this policy to include the surrounding employment buildings, to include all of the office employment area within the policy.

Given that the construction of a scheme for a 72 bed care home has begun on Neville House, this site will be removed from the policy area on the Proposals Map.


Policy AL/RTW 21: Mount Pleasant Avenue Car Park

“Office” has been inserted before “employment uses”

To specify the type of employment use to be delivered PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/RTW 21: Mount

Car parking requirement has been amended to state that: “opportunities to

Following discussions with the Council’s Parking Manager PPWG agree to this amendment

27



Pleasant Avenue Car Park

re-provide a similar amount of public parking spaces on-site shall be explored.”

Policy AL/RTW 21: Mount Pleasant Avenue Car Park

Paragraph 3.47

References to the setting of Calverley Park and Grounds and to Tree Preservation Orders have been deleted

References to renewable energy generation have been deleted

Information has been added to accompanying text at paragraph 3.47

Following discussions with Development Management officers. These would be required as part of the planning application process and it is considered more appropriate to include reference in the supporting text, at paragraph 3.47.


Policy AL/RTW 22: Site of Lifestyle Ford, Mount Ephraim

Development capacity has been amended to include a mix of B1 office and residential use (30 dwellings), the residential element being to the rear (eastern) part of the site, away from the A26. The previous policy was solely for residential use.

Following further discussions with Development Management officers, amendments have been made to reflect the site’s location adjacent to a particularly congested narrow section of the A26 and a number of junctions within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).


Policy AL/RTW 22: Site of Lifestyle Ford, Mount Ephraim

Transport: reference has been added to improvements to road junctions “within the immediate area, including the junction” of Culverden Street with Mount Ephraim

To ensure that redevelopment of the site results in improvements to all of the road junctions around the site as necessary.


Policy AL/RTW 23: John Street Car Park

Paragraph 3.48

The development potential has been amended to reflect the 2013 planning approval for 5 dwellings, approximately 200sqm (net) A1 retail uses and a minimum of 50 public parking spaces.

An outline scheme has been approved by planning application 13/03030 that proposes to infill the gap in the retail units along St Johns Road to provide 3 retail units, 50 public pay-and-display car parking spaces and 10 designated spaces for the proposed development. Five flats above the retail premises are also included in the scheme. Details are included at paragraph


28



3.48.

Policy AL/RTW 24: Land off Grove Hill Road, 8-16 Grove Hill Road

Retail requirements have been amended to use net figures rather than gross:

200sqm (net) – bullet point 1

1,100sqm (net) – bullet point 2

This policy previously included retail requirements expressed as gross figures. Given that the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study requirements are expressed as net figures, it is proposed to use net figures in policies to aid clarity. (The Study uses a gross: net ratio of 70:30)



Statement has been added that residential use above ground floor level fronting onto Grove Hill Road may also be suitable

To provide additional flexibility. PPWG agree to this amendment


Statement has been added that retail uses should be provided on the ground floor to ensure a consistent retail frontage within this section of the Primary Shopping Area



Statement has been added that proposals shall include an assessment of the capacity of the Vale Road / Mount Pleasant / Grove Hill Road roundabout and reference to access to the existing sewerage infrastructure

To reflect comments from KCC Highways following a meeting with TWBC officers and to reflect consultation comments.


Policy AL/RTW 25: Auction House and Car Park, Linden Park Road

Reference has been deleted to auction house facilities being re-provided as part of the development unless alternative provision is made



Policy AL/RTW 25: Auction

Statement has been added that: “public realm improvements shall be delivered

Following discussions with Urban Design and Development Management officers, to provide more guidance for developers

PPWG agree to this

29



House and Car Park, Linden Park Road

along the site’s boundary with Linden Park Road”

and to increase the scope for possible public realm improvements. This site is very close to the Eridge Road Area of Change, Policy AL/RTW 4, which seeks to improve the public realm between the Area of Change and the Pantiles at Linden Park Road, directly adjacent to the Auction House site. Changes to both policies would allow for more comprehensive public realm improvements.

amendment

Policy AL/RTW 26: Kenwood House, Upper Grosvenor Road

Statement has been added that proposals must be accompanied by an Air Quality Assessment and appropriate mitigation measures

To reflect the location of the site within the Air Quality Management Area



Statement has been amended to state that: “proposals shall demonstrate how the character of the immediate area located at a prominent junction with Upper Grosvenor Road and Grosvenor Road will be enhanced.”

Following discussions with Development Management officers, to improve clarity.



Requirement has been deleted that car parking serving the needs of occupants shall be provided

Following discussions with Development Management officers; this would be a standard requirement of a planning application.


Deleted policy: Land at (former) Kent & Sussex Hospital, Mount Ephraim

Former Policy AL/RTW 24: Land at (former) Kent & Sussex Hospital, Mount Ephraim has been deleted

Delete policy as development has commenced on site. (See also comments in relation to Land at Culverden Park / Culverden Park Road .)


30



Deleted policy: Land at Bayham Road and Cemetery Depot

Former Policy AL/RTW 26 contained two site allocations. The policy has been deleted and the allocations have been treated as follows:

Land at Bayham Road – construction has started so this allocation has been deleted

Cemetery Depot – this allocation has been deleted. A report to Cabinet on 21 November 2013 (Business Services Bereavement Plan) set out proposals for the redevelopment and possible expansion of the Crematorium. It is unlikely that this site will become available for uses not related to the Crematorium within the Plan period.


Policy AL/RTW 27: Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Centre Key Employment Area

Statement has been added that: “Proposals for the loss of high quality office (B1) stock within the Town Centre Key Employment Area to other non-employment uses will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that it if not financially viable to continue in office (B1) use or be capable of redevelopment/modernisation to make it viable for future employment use.”

Following discussions with Development Management officers it is proposed to strengthen this policy to resist loss of office space in the town centre through redevelopment.


Policy AL/RTW 28: North Farm/Longfield Road Key Employment Area

Reference has been added to the Local Plan 2006 and Core Strategy Review (Local Plan)


Policy AL/RTW 29: Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Area

Reference has been added to the Local Plan 2006. Amendment has been made to refer to uses “that shall be permitted within the Town Centre Boundary” rather than “directed to”


31



Policy AL/RTW 30: Neighbourhood Centres

Amendments have been made to refer to uses “that shall be permitted within these areas” rather than “directed to”. Reference has been added to the Local Plan 2006.


Policy AL/RTW 31: Recreation Open Space


Change policy title to ‘Recreation Open Space’

Add reference to Land adjacent to Rusthall Recreation Ground, Royal Tunbridge Wells

Add reference to Land at Julian Hewitt Grounds, Farmcombe Road, Royal Tunbridge Wells

Delete reference to Land at Oak Road, Royal Tunbridge Wells

Delete reference to Land to the south of Broadwater Lane, Royal Tunbridge Wells

This policy carries over proposals from 2006 Local Plan policies R3 and R4, deleting any schemes that have already been implemented. As it refers to proposals for enhancement, it is retitled ‘Recreation Open Space’ rather than ‘Recreation Designations.’

Land adjacent to Rusthall Recreation Ground and Land at Julian Hewitt Grounds, Farmcombe Road have been added, following discussions with the Parks and Sports Team Leader, as there are intentions to improve these spaces.

Land at Oak Road and Land to the south of Broadwater Lane are deleted, following discussions with the Parks and Sports Team Leader, as schemes for children’s play space have been completed on these sites.


Southborough


Paragraph 3.63 - 3.67

Changes have been made to:

Update the residential development requirement for Southborough

Reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update


Retail requirements in the Consultation Draft DPD were based on the 2011 Retail and Leisure Study. As reported to PPWG on 18 February 2014 (Item 4) the Council commissioned a new Retail and Leisure Study, the findings of which would be reflected in the next stage of preparing the DPD.


32



Housing Development

Paragraph 3.70

Changes have been made to reflect that a review of the Green Belt is no longer proposed.

The Consultation Draft DPD included proposals for a review of the Green Belt and defined Areas of Search for replacement Rural Fringe. The PPWG report on Green Belt and Rural Fringe (18 March 2014, Item 4) proposed that these be deleted from the DPD. Changes are therefore made to paragraph 3.70.


Policy AL/SO 1: Land at Yew Tree Road (Southborough Library)

Reference to “Southborough” town centre has been added


Policy AL/SO 2: Southborough Hub (Area 1)

The statement has been added: “A comprehensive scheme for redevelopment and/or refurbishment of buildings and spaces will be prepared to provide community facilities, homes and improved parking”.

To provide clarity about the aims and objectives of Policy AL/SO2.



Residential capacity has been introduced from 25 to “approximately 50-60 units”

It was reported to Members at PPWG on the 21 January 2014 that the residential capacity be increased from 25 to 50. This was to reflect the outcome of a separate consultation on the Southborough Hub masterplan carried out by the Borough Council, Kent County Council and Southborough Town Council.

Further ongoing discussions between these organisations have included proposals that include a higher residential capacity to ensure that the development proposals are viable. Including a range in development capacity provides flexibility for development proposals.


Policy AL/SO 2: Southborough

Specific quanta of floorspace for community, assembly and leisure uses

To provide flexibility. PPWG agree to this amendment

33



Hub (Area 1) has been deleted and replaced with the requirement that proposals will be expected to deliver “flexible community floorspace, including space for assembly and leisure uses”.


Specific requirement for delivery of comparison retail uses has been deleted

To reflect the findings of the Retail Study 2014 and the outcome of the Southborough Hub consultation event.

Also, see next row:



Statement has been added: “New retail floorspace (either comparison or convenience goods) which seeks to enhance and diversify provision within Southborough will be supported as part of the masterplan proposals, provided that it is of an appropriate scale and would not have a significant adverse impact on the town”

To reflect the findings of the Retail Study 2014 and the outcome of the Southborough Hub consultation event.



Requirement that proposals will be expected to deliver “approximately 66 public car parking spaces” has been deleted (this is the current level of parking provided at Yew Tree Road car park) and replaced with “retention of existing public car parking capacity”

Requested by Kent County Council during discussions with them about the redevelopment of the Southborough Hub.



Requirement has been amended to: “The Local Planning Authority will expect a masterplan to be prepared by landowners and developers through collaborative working with local businesses, the local community, the

To reflect the collaborative approach being taken to redevelopment of the Southborough Hub.


34



Town Council and the Borough Council to guide development proposals for the area”.


Requirement has been amended to: “any residential uses fronting onto London Road shall be located above ground floor”

For clarity. PPWG agree to this amendment


Requirement has been added: “opportunities shall be explored to retain and improve the Royal Victoria Hall”



Requirement has been amended to state: “land allocated under Policy AL/SO 3 shall be enhanced and rationalised as part of the proposals to develop Southborough Hub (Area 1)”

To facilitate a comprehensive redevelopment of the Southborough Hub site while ensuring that the current amount of open space and recreation land is either maintained or re-provided.



Requirement has been amended to state: “the development shall incorporate and contribute towards the provision of a dedicated cycleway that passes through the site from London Road through Southborough Hub (Area 2) to the junction of The Ridgewaye and Hill Crest.”


Policy AL/SO 3: Recreation Open Space

Additions have been made to policy:

Powder Mill Lane, Southborough

Land east of London Road, Southborough

Additions to the policy, following discussions with the Parks and Sports Team Leader

Check Powdermill lane for Children’s Play Area. If no longer appropriate or can’t deliver, then delete from policy

35



Policy AL/SO 4: Southborough High Brooms Key Employment Area

Reference to Local Plan 2006 and Core Strategy Review (Local Plan) has been added


Policy AL/SO 5: Southborough Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Area



36

Chapter 4: Green Belt and Rural Fringe

Table 4 – Chapter 4: Green Belt and Rural Fringe


Overview

Paragraphs 4.1 - and 4.9

Amendments have been made to paragraphs 4.1 – 4.9

To reflect that the preparation of the Site Allocations DPD will not include a review of the Green Belt. Changes to the existing Green Belt boundaries may be considered as part of the preparation of the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan).

Material relating to the Green Belt review and a section on Regional planning policy has been deleted.


Local planning policy


Paragraphs 4.14 and 4.15 have been added and other paragraphs deleted

To reflect that the preparation of the Site Allocations DPD will not include a review of the Green Belt. Changes to the existing Green Belt boundaries may be considered as part of the preparation of the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan).




Tables 8-9

Deletions and amendments Extensive changes have been made to this section to reflect:

That the preparation of the Site Allocations DPD will not include a review of the Green Belt.

The updated housing land supply situation. The Consultation Draft DPD was based on development figures current at 30 September 2012. The Submission DPD is based on figures current at 31 July 2014.

An extensive section on the methodology behind the Green Belt review has been deleted.


Site Allocations

Paragraph 4.22 – 4.24


Amendments to reflect the amended approach to Policy AL/GB 1 at Hawkenbury Farm. PPWG agreed that Policy AL/GB 1 should be modified regarding the existing allotments and that consequently that the allotments would not be replaced on the site to the north of Hawkenbury Road.


Policy AL/GB 1 Addition of “primarily” in introductory paragraph

For clarity, as other uses are also identified in the Policy. Split policy into 3, one per site to be consistent and

37



renumber policies in this chapter.

Policy AL/GB 1: Speldhurst Road former Allotments


Change site name to ‘Bright Ridge’

Add a requirement to have regard to Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Error in road name corrected

Additional requirement to reflect consultation comments


Policy AL/GB 1: Knights Park

Requirement for provision of a Park and Ride facility has been deleted

Outline planning permission for Knights Park (that did not include Park and Ride provision) was granted in December 2013. The Borough and County Councils have commissioned consultants to undertake a Park & Ride Feasibility Study that will focus on the A26 and A264 radial routes into Tunbridge Wells Town Centre. In the absence of any firm proposals the policy requirement has therefore been deleted.


Policy AL/GB 1: Knights Park


Require a landscape and ecological assessment

Have regard to Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

State that: “the siting and provision of a primary school within the site shall be agreed through discussion with the Local Education Authority”

To reflect consultation comments and for clarity PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/GB 1: Hawkenbury Farm

The housing capacity of the site has been amended from 250 to a range of 220-250

The site area has been reduced. The area of land to the north east of the Hawkenbury Farm Rural Fringe site, located within the Green Belt, is not included within the policy site area.


Policy AL/GB 1: Hawkenbury

Amendments have been made to: To reflect consultation comments and for clarity PPWG agree to this

38



Farm Require a landscape and ecological assessment

Have regard to Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

State that: “the siting and provision of a primary school within the site shall be agreed through discussion with the Local Education Authority”

amendment


Addition have been made to state that: “opportunities shall be explored to re-provide allotments within the site boundaries”





Delete requirement that no built development shall take place within areas identified as open space

Delete requirement for the area of land to the north east of the Hawkenbury Farm Rural Fringe site to be used for allotments and open space



Paragraph 4.23 New paragraph: reference has been added to the sewerage infrastructure


Deleted policy: Land at Notcutts Nursery, off Tonbridge

Former Policy AL/GB 2: Land at Notcutts Nursery, off Tonbridge Road, Pembury has been deleted

This site, located within the Green Belt, can be considered as part of the review of the Green Belt that may be needed to inform the Core Strategy Review (Local Plan).


39



Road, Pembury

Paragraph 4.24 Paragraph moved to this section from later in the Chapter

This paragraph has been moved from later in the Chapter to provide context for Land at Hawkenbury Farm.


Rural Fringe (long-term land reserve)

Paragraphs 4.25– 4.29


For clarity. The preparation of the Site Allocations DPD will not include a review of the Green Belt. There will therefore be no designation of replacement Rural Fringe sites in the Site Allocations DPD. References relating to the Green Belt review have therefore been deleted.


Deleted policy: Replacement Rural Fringe

Former Policy AL/GB 4: Replacement Rural Fringe has been deleted

The preparation of the Site Allocations DPD will not include a review of the Green Belt. There will be no designation of replacement rural fringe sites in the Site Allocations DPD.


Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt


Minor amendments have been made to paragraphs 4.30 – 4.35


40

Chapter 5: Paddock Wood

Table 5 – Chapter 5: Paddock Wood


Overview

Paragraph 5.1

Reference to Tonbridge & Malling Borough has been added

To correct omission PPWG agree to this amendment

Key constraints and settlement analysis

Paragraph 5.7

Reference to ‘area of critical drainage’ has been added

For information PPWG agree to this amendment


Paragraphs 5.10-5.16

Amendments have been made to reflect updates in the evidence base

To reflect:

Update to Surface Water Management Plan currently being prepared by Kent County Council

2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update

The work of Paddock Wood Town Council in assessing the need for community facilities

5.13, add date if it is known

Housing Development



Update the development requirement for Paddock Wood

Set the context for the level of growth allocated in the Chapter



Mixed Use Development

Paragraph 5.19

Amendments have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update



Community Reference has been added to the work of Paddock Wood Town Council in

For update PPWG agree to this

41



Facilities

Paragraph 5.20

establishing requirements for a community centre.

amendment

Policy AL/PW 1: Land off Station Road / Commercial Road and Commercial Road West Car Park

Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update.




Residential potential, if supplementary to the overall mixed-use development, has been added

Following consultation comments. As reported to PPWG 15 October 2013 (Item 4), the Council’s Urban Designer was undertaking further work to establish the capacity of the site. The amended policy wording follows this assessment.



Amend site boundary to include 26-38 Commercial Road and 7-9 Church Road

As reported to PPWG 15 October 2013 (Item 4), the Council’s Urban Designer would undertake further work to establish the capacity of the site. The amended policy follows this assessment.

The boundary will only be expanded to enable the site to accommodate the mixed use scheme appropriate to this allocation (e.g. comparison retail and housing on upper floors).




Reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update


42



Add information regarding transport and flood risk assessment




Policy AL/PW 3: Land at Church Farm and Land at Mascalls Court Road

Amendments have been made to the layout of Policy AL/PW 3

Consultation Draft Policy AL/PW 3 contained references to a masterplan in different places in the policy. The policy has been reordered to summarise masterplan requirements at the start, followed by general development requirements.

Add wording to read (c3)” capacity of providing approx.”.


Reference has been added to the Surface Water Management Plan, Table 5.3, which seeks to reduce run-off from the land

For further clarity and commitment to the provision of flood alleviation / surface water management measures

Change wording to read in masterplanning. “Latter phase likely to fall”..


Under the requirements of the Masterplan, and with specific reference to the Mascalls Court Road site, a requirement has been added that proposals shall demonstrate that any identified need for ecological mitigation is adequately addressed



A requirement has been added that proposals should include use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) within the overall development.

Following consultation comments. For further clarity and commitment to the provision of flood alleviation / surface water management measures


Policy AL/PW 3: Amendments have been made to state Following work by the Town Council to identify potential sites PPWG agree to this

43



Land at Church Farm and Land at Mascalls Court Road

that if additional community facilities are required then options should be explored in cooperation with the Town Council

for community facilities amendment


Additional text has been added in relation to pedestrian and cycle routes and the need to provide linkages to surrounding areas and facilities

To reflect newly adopted Green Infrastructure Plan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)



A requirement has been added that development should contribute to transport improvements, to include the named junctions

Following further discussions with Kent County Council Highways Officers


Paragraph 5.30 Paragraph relating to the former Paddock Wood to Hawkhurst railway line has been added

To reflect newly adopted Green Infrastructure Plan SPD PPWG agree to this amendment

Paragraph 5.31 Paragraph relating to the Farmsteads SPD has been added


New Policy AL/PW 4: Land at Mascalls Farm

A new policy AL/PW 4 has been added to allocate Land at Mascalls Farm

As Members agreed at PPWG on 16 December 2013, Land at Mascalls Farm would also be allocated in the DPD. The wording of this new policy is intended to follow the framework of Policy AL/PW 3.

Although the principle of allocating the site was agreed, detailed wording has not been discussed by PPWG before.

Amend to read “capacity of providing approx.”.

and in masterplanning. “Latter phase likely to fall”.

similar to AL/PW 3


New paragraphs have been added To support new Policy AL/PW 4. PPWG agree to this

44



amendment

Policy AL/PW 5: Key Employment Areas

References to Local Plan 2006 and Core Strategy Review (Local Plan) have been added


Policy AL/PW 6: Paddock Wood Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Areas



45

Chapter 6: Cranbrook

Table 6 – Chapter 6: Cranbrook



Paragraphs 6.4-6.8

Changes have been made to reflect:

The 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update

Work being undertaken with Cranbrook & Sissinghurst Parish Council regarding the provision of a community facility



Paragraph 6.8 Reference to Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty has been added


Housing Development

Paragraph 6.9

Changes have been made to update the development requirement for Cranbrook.



Paragraph 6.10 Minor amendments Amendments have been made to reflect changes to policies elsewhere in the Chapter


Policy AL/CR 1 Policy AL/CR 1 allocated 3 sites. These sites have been dealt with as follows:

Former Council Offices, High Street – this allocation has been deleted. Permission 13/02502 for 26 later living apartments has started on the site

Police Station, Wheatfield Drive – this allocation is retained in Policy AL/CR 1

Post Office Delivery Depot and Land at Stone Street/High Street/Crane Lane – this has been deleted and the policy requirements relating to the site incorporated into Policy AL/CR 5 for clarity


Policy AL/CR 2: New policy AL/CR 2 has been added The report to PPWG on 3 September 2013 (Item 3d) PPWG agree to this

46



Cranbrook Library Site

allocating Cranbrook Library Site. highlighted that a revised site had been submitted by Kent County Council for consideration, including the existing library building. This has now been reassessed and is proposed for allocation. This would be dependent on re-providing the library facilities elsewhere (planned to be at Wilkes Field, see AL/CR 6). The development capacity has been assessed by the Council’s Urban Designer.

amendment

Policy AL/CR 4: Land adjacent to the Crane Valley

Amendments have been made to the layout of Policy AL/CR 4

Consultation Draft Policy AL/CR 3 (now renumbered AL/CR 4) contained references to a masterplan in different places in the policy. The policy has been reordered to summarise masterplan requirements at the start, followed by general development requirements. The previous policy is therefore shown struck through in its entirety and the amended policy is shown after.

Change to read

“capacity of providing approx.”.

and in masterplanning. “Latter phase likely to fall”.


An addition has been made to state: “proposals must reflect an understanding of the unique landscape of the High Weald AONB and respect the character and pattern of settlement within the AONB.”

To reflect consultation comments. PPWG agree to this amendment


An addition has been made to state: “opportunities for providing small-scale convenience retail floorspace as part of proposed development should be explored. Proposals may require submission of a retail impact assessment to demonstrate that there will be no significant adverse impact on Cranbrook town centre or any other centre in the

To update the requirements of Policy AL/CR 4 with the findings of the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update.


47



surrounding area”


References to ‘Angley Road’ have been deleted and ‘Hartley Road’ inserted

Following consultation comments, to correct error in road name PPWG agree to this amendment


Amendments have been made to state: “landscape buffers shall be provided within the area, as shown on the Proposals Map, particularly to the west near Hartley Road, to the north to existing built development and as a buffer to Crane Brook and the Local Wildlife Site, Site of Local Nature Conservation Value and areas of Ancient Woodland”

Consultation comments stressed the need to consider buffers to existing built development to the north



Bullet point regarding infrastructure contributions has been added

For consistency with other policies PPWG agree to this amendment


Wording has been added to reflect:

Drainage runoff into Crane Brook

The need for a Management Plan

Proximity to Cranbrook Conservation Area

Additional paragraph 6.15 has been added following consultation comments.

Paragraphs 6.16 – 6.17 have moved more detailed wording from the policy to the supporting text.


Retail

Paragraph 6.18

Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update



48



Policy AL/CR 5: Post Office Delivery Depot and Land at Stone Street / High Street / Crane Lane


Delete wording from Policy AL/CR 1

Incorporate into Policy AL/CR 5

To reflect consultation comments. In the 2013 Consultation Draft DPD requirements for the Post Office Delivery Deport site were contained in two policies, dealing with different uses. Requirements have been amalgamated into AL/CR 5 for clarity.


Policy AL/CR 5: Post Office Delivery Depot and Land at Stone Street / High Street / Crane Lane

A requirement has been added that proposals for development shall explore the potential to create public footpath linkages between the site and Wilkes Field

To reflect consultation comments and enhance links between the two sites.


Paragraphs 6.19 Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update



Paragraph 6.19 Text has been added to state that proposals for redevelopment should include consultation with the Environment Agency

To reflect the site’s proximity to the Crane Brook, following consultation comments.


Policy AL/CR 6: Wilkes Field

Amendments have been made to the first paragraph of Policy AL/CR 6

To simplify the policy and to refer to the Parish Council’s work developing proposals for the site.



Requirement has been added to state that: “development must reflect an understanding of the unique landscape of the High Weald AONB and respect the


49



character and pattern of settlement within the AONB.”


Bullet point requiring the need for the community facility to be demonstrated has been deleted

For clarity. The need for a community facility was identified in the Core Strategy 2010 and so this requirement is unnecessary.



Policy has been amended to require that proposals for development shall explore the potential to create public footpath linkages between the site and the Post Office Delivery Depot and Land at Stone Street/High Street/Crane Lane.

To reflect consultation comments and enhance links between the two sites.



Term “open book” has been added into the requirement for a viability assessment


Policy AL/CR 7: Cranbrook Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Area



50

Chapter 7: Hawkhurst (Highgate), The Moor and Gill’s Green

Table 7 – Chapter 7: Hawkhurst (Highgate), The Moor and Gill’s Green


Paragraph 7.1 Additions have been made to refer to Four Throws and Sawyers Green


Paragraph 7.6 Minor amendments have been made relating to Lillesden

To update the development status of Lillesden PPWG agree to this amendment

Paragraph 7.9 Changes have been made to reflect the 2014 Retail and Leisure Study Update




Amendments have been made to these paragraphs to reflect:

Hawkhurst’s position within the AONB

Transport improvements

Financial contributions


Limits to Built Development of Hawkhurst (Highgate) and The Moor

Paragraph 7.14

A new paragraph has been added to highlight that the Limits to Built Development of Hawkhurst (Highgate) and The Moor have been joined

As reported to PPWG on 13 May 2014, the Limits to Built Development (LBDs) for Hawkhurst (Highgate) and The Moor have been joined following Parish Council comments. The LBDs are connected along Highgate Hill to ensure that no additional land is included within the new LBD that could then come under pressure for development. This paragraph explains the approach.


51



Housing



Amendments to reflect the joining up of the LBDs of Hawkhurst (Highgate) and The Moor.

Amendments to paragraph 7.17 reflect the updated housing requirement for the village. The Consultation Draft DPD was based on development figures current at 30 September 2012. The Submission DPD is based on figures current at 31 July 2014.

Amendments to paragraphs 7.18 – 7.19 reflect the existing permission for the Hawkhurst Castle site.


Policy AL/HA 1: Hawkhurst Castle

An addition has been made to state that the site could also be suitable for a residential care home (C2), residential development (C3) or for a mix of C2 and C3 uses

To reflect the current planning approval on the site and allow flexibility for future development.



An addition has been made to state that development shall “seek where possible to” secure the future of Hawkhurst Castle through refurbishment.

To reflect the existing permission on the site and allow flexibility for future development.



An addition has been made to state that proposals must reflect an understanding of the unique landscape of the High Weald AONB and respect the character and pattern of settlement within the AONB

To reflect consultation comments PPWG agree to this amendment


A requirement for ecological assessment has been added

To reflect consultation comments PPWG agree to this amendment


Requirement that financial contributions towards community facilities will be

To reflect consultation comments. Permission has been granted at King George V Field, The Moor for a community


52



sought has been added centre. An additional policy has been introduced to safeguard this site (see Policy AL/HA 4 below).

Paragraph 7.20 Amendments have been made to refer to the location within the AONB and to add reference to sewerage infrastructure

Minor amendments following consultation comments. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/HA 2: Land off Highgate Hill

Addition has been made to state that development proposals must demonstrate that the approaches to development reflect an understanding of the unique landscape of the High Weald AONB to ensure that they respect the character and pattern of settlements within the AONB


Policy AL/HA 2: Land off Highgate Hill

Reference to accommodating a community facility on site has been deleted. Addition has been made to state that financial contributions towards community facilities will be sought.

To reflect consultation comments. Permission has been granted at King George V Field, The Moor for a community centre. An additional policy has been introduced to safeguard this site (see Policy AL/HA 4 below).


Paragraph 7.21 Paragraph has been added to reflect permission 14/00547 for Land at Birchfield, Rye Road

To reflect the recent permission at Birchfield, Rye Road (14/00547). Policy AL/HA 3 is retained in the DPD in case the current permission is not implemented, or to guide detailed

proposals following the outline permission. PPWG agree to this amendment



Minor amendments have been made to refer to the AONB and to sewerage infrastructure

For clarity and to reflect consultation comments. PPWG agree to this amendment

Policy AL/HA 3: Birchfield, Rye Road

Site capacity has been amended from 25 to 26 dwellings

To reflect the recent permission at Birchfield, Rye Road (14/00547).


53




Addition has been made to state that development proposals must demonstrate that they reflect an understanding of the unique landscape of the High Weald AONB and ensure that they respect the character and pattern of settlements within the AONB



Addition have been made to state that financial contributions towards community facilities will be sought



Paragraph 7.24 Minor amendments For clarity PPWG agree to this amendment

Other


Paragraphs have been added to set out the approach to the provision of community facilities



Policy AL/HA 4: King George V Playing Fields, The Moor

New policy AL/HA 4 has been added to protect King George V Playing Fields site for community facilities

To reflect consultation comments. Permission has been granted at King George V Field, The Moor for a community centre. To date development has yet to commence. This policy is to reflect similar policies for community facilities in Paddock Wood and Cranbrook.


Paragraph 7.27 Paragraph has been added to reflect the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014


Policy AL/HA 5: Gill’s Green Key Employment Area



54



Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Area


Policy AL/HA 6: Hawkhurst Town Centre Boundary and Primary Shopping Area

Amendments have been made to explain the status of the ‘Town Centre Boundary’ policy (AL/HA 6) in relation to the village of Hawkhurst.

As reported to PPWG on 13 May 2014, although for consistency with the Core Strategy and other policies in the Site Allocations DPD, the term ‘Town Centre Boundary’ is still used, it is recognised that Hawkhurst is a village. Amendments have been made to these paragraphs and Policy AL/HA 6 to reflect this.


Policy AL/HA 7: Recreation Open Space: Gunther Close

Amendments have been made to policy wording


55

Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas

Table 8 – Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas


Paragraph 8.3 Reference to Farmsteads Assessment Guidance Supplementary Planning Document has been added




Amendments have been made to update the development requirement for the Villages and Rural Areas.



Housing

Paragraph 8.7

Changes have been made to update the development requirement for the Villages and Rural Areas.



Paragraph 8.8 Paragraph relating to Former Sissinghurst Primary School has been added


Policy AL/VRA1 Former Sissinghurst Primary School

Statement has been added that the site is allocated for “residential development (C3) providing” approximately 8-12 dwellings

For clarity.

This site has current planning approval for redevelopment that is in accordance with Policy AL/VRA1. However, to date development has yet to commence.


Policy AL/VRA 4: Brook Farm Key Employment Area



Deleted policy: Infrastructure -Bewl Water Reservoir

Former Policy AL/VRA 4: Infrastructure - Bewl Water Reservoir has been deleted

The Villages and Rural Areas report (18 February 2014, Item 3) proposed that the policy on Bewl Water (formerly AL/VRA 4) be amended to reflect the fact that additional storage capacity will not be needed until 2030, after the end of the current plan period. It was also proposed that the policy be moved from


56

Table 8 – Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas


Chapter 8: Villages and Rural Areas to Chapter 2: Methodology and Strategy. Changes have therefore been made to both chapters to reflect this. The new policy in Chapter 2 is numbered AL/STR 4.

site allocations development plan document proposed ... · 1 site allocations development plan...

Documents