76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 22 September 2021 by David Smith BA(Hons) DMS MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 5th October 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/A2280/W/20/3249371 76 Ivy Street, Rainham, ME8 8BH • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr B Quaye against the decision of Medway Council. • The application Ref MC/20/0179, dated 23 January 2020, was refused by notice dated 18 March 2020. • The development proposed is two storey side extension and conversion into three flats. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. A scheme for a two storey side extension and conversion into three flats was dismissed at appeal last year (Ref: APP/A2280/W/19/3244021). This was on the basis that the proposed development would have a harmful effect on local highway conditions, particularly in terms of parking. This proposal responds to that decision by including a garage to serve flat 1 as well as removing the dormers.

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision Furthermore, in the light of the Inspector’s findings on the issue, the Council no longer wishes to pursue its reason for refusal relating to the loss of a dwelling suitable for continued single family occupation. Main Issues 3. These are the effect of the proposal on parking and highway conditions in Ivy Street and whether living conditions for future occupiers would be satisfactory with reference to outlook. Reasons Parking and highway conditions 4. Ivy Street is narrow with a limited number of on-street parking bays compared to the number of houses without off-street parking. Resident parking permits operate between 0800 and 1000 hours. 5. The existing dwelling has space at the side to accommodate vehicles but this area would be built over by the extension. The Council does not include the proposed garage as available for parking as its dimensions would be less than 7m by 3m. However, given the restricted availability of parking along Ivy Street, the likelihood of the proposed garage being used to keep a car off the road should not be discounted. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A2280/W/20/3249371 6. As noted by the previous Inspector, the parking standards referred to by Policy T13 of the Medway Local Plan of 2003 are of some age. There is no indication that they took into account the considerations listed at paragraph 107 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, although the proposed development would fall short of them, they do not form a sound basis to judge the proposal against. 7. The appeal site is close to the public transport network including Rainham railway station and bus stops. The services and facilities of Rainham town centre are also close by. Therefore it might not be essential for future residents to have a car. However, there is no information about local car ownership levels for flatted accommodation of this type. Indeed, whilst many journeys could be made without private transport, there is insufficient evidence to exclude the possibility that future occupiers would be car owners. They would therefore require somewhere to keep their vehicles. 8. The appellant’s surveys show that on-street parking was available on each of the three days at 0900, 1300 and 1800 hours, including on a Saturday.

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision However, the photographs were not taken at times when people were most likely to be at home. The Council’s surveys were undertaken between 0600 and 0700 hours and between 1900 and 2000 hours. They found that on-street parking was at capacity with instances of kerb parking wholly or partly blocking the footway. A local resident has also highlighted instances of parking on the double yellow lines and outlined the general problems associated with parking. 9. The weight of evidence points to considerable existing parking pressure in Ivy Street, especially in the evenings when it appears to regularly reach saturation level. In addition, inconsiderate parking already takes place making conditions difficult for pedestrians, especially for anyone in a wheelchair or pushing a pram. Moreover, the situation has an adverse impact on the living environment in the street by causing inconvenience due to the competition for the limited number of spaces. 10. Because of the likelihood that future occupiers would need to find somewhere to park their vehicles the proposal would exacerbate the existing parking stress.

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision Day to day living would be made more difficult and the risk of blocking access for those on foot or for emergency vehicles would increase. In short, from the evidence provided, the current situation would be made worse by permitting three flats in place of a single dwelling. 11. Therefore the proposal would harm parking and living conditions in Ivy Street and would be contrary to Local Plan Policies BNE2 and T1 which are concerned with protecting residential amenity as well as Policy T13. Living conditions 12. The living area of flat 3 on the first floor would have a high level window in the side elevation. A full depth window would enable a greater outward view but the proposed window would allow light to enter this space. Furthermore it would enable some appreciation to be gained of the outside world given the separation to the adjoining property. As the cooking and eating area and bedroom would both have fenestration with lower cills the accommodation as a whole would not be overly enclosed or dingy. The overall size and layout of the flat would ensure a high standard of amenity as expected by the Framework. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A2280/W/20/3249371 13. Therefore living conditions for future occupiers would be satisfactory and, as such, there would be no conflict with Policy BNE2. Other Matters 14. The side extension would fill a gap in the street scene and would be in keeping with the generally tight grain of the rows of terraced houses along Ivy Street. Furthermore, the proposal would create three small units that would potentially be suitable to first time buyers. The Framework supports the creation of well- designed places and housing to meet the needs of different groups in the community. However, it also expects that places are safe, inclusive and accessible. Therefore these considerations do not outweigh the harm that would be caused by the likely additional demand for on-street parking. 15. As the appeal site is within 6km of the North Kent Marshes Special Protection Area the additional residential accommodation would have a likely significant effect on the over-wintering bird interest by reason of recreational disturbance. The appellant has already contributed towards the Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy.

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — Appeal Decision However, as the appeal is to be dismissed, there is no need for further consideration to be given to this or to the provisions of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations. Conclusion 16. The proposal would not comply with the development plan and there are no other considerations that warrant deciding the appeal other than in accordance with it. Therefore, for the reasons given, the proposed development is unacceptable and the appeal should not succeed.

76 Ivy Street, Rainham, GILLINGHAM, ME8 8BH — Medway Council — David Smith INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3