DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD 5 November 2009 Reference: 08/01543/FUL Officer: Mrs Sonia Bunn Location: Land Between Junction Manor Way And London Road

And Ingress Park Avenue Ingress Park

Proposal: Provision of a secondary means of access and fastrack route into Ingress

Park Applicant: Nick Davies Crest Nicholson (South East) Ltd

Agent: Davies Arnold Cooper/Colin Oliffe

Target Date: 24/03/2009 Parish / Ward: Swanscombe & Greenhithe T.C. / Greenhithe RECOMMENDATION: Approval SITE SPECIFIC POLICY (1) Dartford Local Plan - Policies H4 (Redevelopment of Ingress Abbey site) and RT9 (Potential hotel or other tourist accommodation). Policy H6: development of Swanscombe Marshes and Policy E4: Land at the former Swanscombe cement works identified for employment development. (2) Local Plan Review - Policies MDS2 (Greenhithe Riverside Major development Site; DD2 (Mixed Use urban village; DD6 (Green Grid); H1 (Housing Provision), H16 (Social Housing Provision); H17 (Low cost market housing); E1 (Provision of Employment Land), MDS7 (Swanscombe Peninsula Major Development site), Policy T1 (Fastrack) SITE DESCRIPTION (3) This proposal relates to the Ingress Park development but largely sits outside the extent of the original development and comprises a narrow site which extends from the eastern boundary of Ingress Park to the junction of Manor Way and London Road. The application site covers an area of approximately 3.17 hectares. (4) The site is bounded at the western end by Phase 4 of Ingress Park and the previous school site allocation within the development. The route crosses an area of landfill on Swanscombe Peninsula, to the north of this is Blackduck Marsh. To the south of the proposed route is the Public Right of Way DS3. Beyond this to the south and to the east of Lovers Lane, is a triangular area, formerly known as the Croxton and Garry site, which is included within the Council's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment as having potential for residential development. To the east of the application site is the Manor Way industrial area.

(5) Outside of the Ingress Park development the land within the application site is unmanaged and overgrown. Historically the site and surrounding areas were heavily industrialised but this has all been cleared now and one part (Lovers Lane pit) is landfill. The land in some parts has regenerated and has become overgrown. PROW DS3 sits on a chalk spine and there is a band of mature trees either side of this spine. The site has a varied and complex topography, with chalk spines, filled areas and unfilled areas. The application cuts across several of these levels. (6) The PROW DS3 runs east to west from the junction of London Road with Manor Way to Lovers Lane which borders the east boundary of Ingress Park. There is currently a ramped path from Lovers Lane into the residential development at Ingress. The PROW DS3 turns north when it meets Lovers Lane and heads towards the river, becoming DS29 before joining with PROW DS1. THE PROPOSAL (7) The proposal is to create a Secondary Means of Access (SMoA) for Ingress Park from Ingress Park Avenue to the Manor Way/London Road junction in the east. The route has also been designed to be used by Fastrack so that a through route for Fastrack can be provided through the Ingress Park development. (8) Fastrack will run along Ingress Park Avenue to its end where it will stop in order to serve the local centre. It will then turn south onto the proposed SMoA route at which point it will then be joined by general vehicles. These are diverted from Ingress Park Avenue around Stonely Crescent in order to avoid conflict in the bus stop areas. The dual purpose route will then run southwards along the east boundary to the site before turning east, where currently it will not be fronted by any development, before joining Manor Way at a roundabout. The proposal also includes an improved access onto London Road in order to provide improved flow of traffic. (9) The proposed route also includes a pedestrian/cycle route alongside it and a direct footpath/cycleway link from Lovers Lane to the south which will then provide direct north-south access to Ingress Park Avenue and onwards to the riverside (10) The proposal has been amended following discussion with officers to address some of the residents¿ concerns and also to create more direct pedestrian and cycle links. (11) The applicants have submitted a number of reports in support of the application which include: a Transport Statement; Flood Risk Assessment; Ecological Assessment; Archaeological desk-based assessment; and a Design and Access Statement. RELEVANT HISTORY (12) Outline planning permission for 950 houses was granted at Ingress Park in November 2000, following the completion of a s.106 legal agreement. One of the conditions on the outline planning permission required the provision of a public transport route to the east of the site. A route known as the Gun Barrel route across Swanscombe Peninsula to Manor Way was put forward as the solution. It was anticipated that this public transport route would also provide an emergency access route to serve the development. (13) It was also anticipated that the public transport route would be delivered as part of the development of Swanscombe Peninsula. However, as this development has not come forward as expected the public transport route and secondary means of vehicular access have not been provided. The applicant seeks to address this lack of provision through the current application. COMMENTS FROM ORGANISATIONS (14) The consultees have been consulted on the revised plans and their comments are summarised below.

(15) Kent Highways: They confirm that they have no objections to the revised proposal and that all previous issues raised have now been addressed. (16) KCC Archaeology: Agree with assessment report but notes that this suggests there may be some post-medieval industrial activity and therefore advises that this should be subject to suitable mitigation. In addition the report suggests there may be Palaeolithic remains near the junction with Manor Way and London Road and advises that this needs specialist investigations. (17) Swanscombe and Greenhithe Town Council: Object to the application unless the following issues are covered by condition: (i) rectifying the severe flooding issues already encountered at the junction of London Road, Craylands Lane and Manor Way; (ii) Adequate and appropriate traffic control needs to be confirmed at the junction of London Road, Craylands Lane and Manor Way; (iii) The protection of all footpaths in the immediate area is of paramount importance and their protection and enhancement should be included in any planning permission granted. (18) Kent Wildlife Trust: advise that the proposal is likely to lead to fragmentation of habitat and suggest conditions are imposed to mitigate against this impact. (19) Environment Agency: Raise no objections but suggest a number of conditions relating to surface water disposal and details of how contamination will be dealt with. They advise that SUDS should not discharge to ground and will need to be fully lined due to the risk of contamination of the underlying groundwater. (20) KCC Public Rights of Way: Confirm that they are happy with proposals for the new alignment of PROW in the area and how they fit with the Fastrack route. They advise that if planning permission is granted it will be necessary to formally divert part of Public Footpath DS29 under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. (21) Thames Water: No objections NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION (22) Four letters has been received together with a representation from the Ingress Park Residents Association. (23) One representation advises that the secondary means of access is essential and asks for the work to be sped up. (24) The second letter, signed by 8 people was sent in as an objection to the original scheme due to the creation of a secondary means of access for vehicles which formed junction opposite their houses and others onto Ingress Park Avenue. The representation suggested that the vehicles share the Fastrack route. In the revised submission this is exactly the proposal and I have discussed the revised plans with the author of the letter and he is happy with the current proposal as he considers it does not have an adverse impact on his property. (25) The third letter raises concerns about Fastrack entering Ingress Park, giving the reason that this is a residential area with narrow roads and that the speed of the buses will be unsuitable for this area. The secondary means of access may also result in the area becoming a rat run for motorists when London Road is busy. (26) A fourth representation recently received raises concern about the impact of the proposal. Firstly they raise concerns about the impact on the existing footpath DS3 which they advise is a well-used and much enjoyed rural footpath. They are concerned the proposal will impact on the natural feel of the footpath. They also raise concerns about ecology of the area as it has regenerated over the years and there are now bats and reptiles using the site, as well as the important trees and plants. The concern is that this will result in further incremental loss of wildlife. They point out that both the ecological assessment and the response by the Kent Wildlife Trust (KWT) indicate that conservation of this semi-natural woodland is

important. If the application is permitted they advise that it is vital the character of DS3 and the wildlife in the area is protected. The landscape of the road would also benefit from a roadside nature reserve project as promoted by KWT. The letter also raises concern about the junction with London Road. This is a difficult junction, particularly for vehicles using Craylands Lane. The junction has also been subject to sporadic flooding which results in highways safety issues. Further traffic at the junction would exacerbate this. (27) A representation was also received on the original scheme from the Ingress Park residents association. They draw attention to their petition to reduce speeds on Ingress Park Avenue through traffic calming. They then go onto register concerns about the speed limits shown in the planning application documentation, the original layout plans showed speeds of 70kph on the link road and 25mph for the priority public transport route. They consider that 70kph is too high when approaching a 20mph zone. RELEVANT POLICIES Adopted Dartford Local Plan (28) Dartford Local Plan Policy H4 identifies Ingress Park for a mixed-use re-development that secures refurbishment of the Listed Buildings. (29) Policy H6 identifies Swanscombe Marshes as suitable for development with associated major infrastructure. Proposals prejudicial to the long term development of the area will be resisted. (30) Policy E4 advises that development proposals for the former Swanscombe Cement Works should incorporate appropriate access arrangements. (31) Policy T5 advises that proposals for major housing development should incorporate public transport facilities and infrastructure. Policy T3 advises that the Council will promote the provision of integrated public transport services, facilities and systems. (32) Policy B1 seeks to ensure a high standard of development and design and sets out criteria against which all new development should be assessed. Dartford Local Plan Review Second Deposit Draft (33) Local Plan Review Policy MDS2 identifies Ingress Park as a riverside major development site, developed as an urban village, which contributes to the development of the Green Grid network and the Borough's affordable housing requirements. (34) Policy DD6 seeks to ensure that new developments contribute to the effectiveness of Green Grid by setting out objectives for the provision of open space and rights of way. Policy DD11 seeks a high standard of design in all proposals and sets out criteria for new development. (35) Policy RT4 seeks the provision of new footpaths and cycleways to provide public access to the riverside. (36) Policy MDS 7 identifies Swanscombe Peninsula West as suitable for a mixed use development site. (37) Policy T1 safeguards land for Fastrack and development will not be permitted if it is likely to prejudice it's implementation. South East Plan (38) Policy KTG1 sets out the issues that should be addressed within local policy and programmes. This includes the requirement that previously used land should be used for

development before Greenfield sites and that higher density development should be linked by public transport. (39) Policy CC7 advises that the scale and pace will depend on sufficient capacity in existing infrastructure and where this is not the case, the scale and pace of development will be dependant upon additional capacity being released. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER'S COMMENTS Key Issues (40) The key issues to be considered in this case are in my opinion: the need for the Secondary Means of Access and Fastrack route; the options for routing; the impact of the proposal on ecology and archaeology; and the suitability of the proposed scheme to meet the needs of users both cars, pedestrians and cyclists. Need for Secondary Means of Access and Fastrack route to east (41) At present the only means of traffic access to Ingress Park is via the London Road junction with Ingress Park Avenue. This is considered by Kent Highways to be an acceptable access to serve the 950 dwellings currently built but it does not allow for an alternative access should an emergency arise. Emergency vehicles can currently access the site via the haul route across Blackduck Marsh but this is only a temporary solution and does not allow use by general traffic, should part of Ingress Park Avenue become unusable, and does not provide for long term emergency access. A secondary means of access would therefore ease traffic queues at the existing junction, provide capacity for additional development on the site, allow for emergency access and also provide a route for Fastrack. (42) The principle of Fastrack running through Ingress Park was established at the time the original planning application for the development was considered. In fact one of the reasons that planning permission was granted for this relatively high density development was that it would be a public transport orientated development, with frequent bus services provide by Fastrack enabling a five minute walk time from most of the houses. As the site is still under development and there is no direct route in and out for public transport, there is not a proper public transport service and car usage is therefore inevitably high. In order to encourage people to leave the car at home and take public transport it has to be easily accessibly to their home and provide a frequent reliable service. In order for Fastrack to meet these needs it must have direct dedicated access in and out of the site. Construction is underway to complete the Fastrack link into the site on the west boundary providing a dedicated route to Ingress Park Avenue from Greenhithe Station. The access road to the east of the site would allow Fastrack to run straight through the development thus speeding up running times and increasing the number of dwellings within the development to be five minutes walk from a Fastrack stop. (43) The provision for Fastrack includes: Fastrack priority for the bus stops at the eastern end of Ingress Park Avenue which serve the local centre; Fastrack priority to be incorporated into the traffic signal installation at the junction with London Road; and an additional bus stop on the straight part of the route to serve the future development of the Croxton and Garry site. (44) However, the scheme allows for Fastrack to be re-routed at the end of Ingress Park Avenue onto a different route, should a scheme come forward whereby a dedicated route could be provided which linked to the proposed development on the remainder of Swanscombe Peninsula. However, given the constraints on the site and the sensitive nature of the area I consider that this is very much in the long term and that the option delivers a satisfactory shared route for Fastrack, allowing a through Fastrack service to operate with Ingress Park in the medium term. (45) The secondary means of access route also facilitates access to the Croxton and Garry site, to the south of the route, which is likely to come forward for residential development.

Route location (46) The applicants have carried out work to determine the optimum location for the secondary means of access/public transport route. However the corridor available for development is restricted by the ecological importance of Blackduck Marsh itself and the wooded area and further to the south by the location of the existing footpath DS3 on a chalk spine. However, the biggest constraint has been the varied nature of the topography in the area. The Croxton and Garry site is at a much lower level than Ingress Park and any road between the two sites would need to be on a bridge type structure, which would be unsightly, costly and would not facilitate the future development of this site. The chalk spine which supports PROW DS3 is not wide enough to accommodate the secondary means of access road as well. In order to protect the trees along the public right of way and avoid the lower levels alongside the chalk spine the proposed route has been moved to the north, into the area of landfill where the land is at a higher level due to the fill and much of the land here is not occupied by trees. (47) The route within Ingress Park follows Ingress Park Avenue which is the main distributor road through the site. At the crescent at the eastern end, Fastrack will continue straight through a dedicated bus stop area which will serve the local centre and riverside area. General traffic, however, will divert around the crescent and then join the main route again at a junction where Fastrack will have priority. The route will then proceed southwards before turning south-east parallel with the route of DS3 in order to enable connection with Manor Way. I am satisfied that this route now minimises adverse impact as it ensures that Fastrack serves the local centre, minimises large highway interventions within the Ingress Park site and will not in my opinion result in any adverse detrimental impact on neighbouring residents. Impact on ecology and trees (48) The land to the east of Ingress Park, known as Swanscombe Peninsula has been regenerating for some time and there are large swathes of vegetated areas and mature trees. One of the least vegetated areas is the Lovers Lane Pit across which the route will go. For this reason I consider this to be the optimum route, however, due to the difficult topography area, although the route itself is relatively narrow there is increased land take due to the need for embankments. Unfortunately, therefore, a number of trees still have to be removed as a result of the proposal; these are situated predominantly along the eastern boundary of Ingress Park together with a large stand of trees to the south of Lovers Lane Pit. . Although regrettable, I consider that this is unavoidable due to the scale of the engineering works proposed, the fact that the Fastrack route is on a very tight alignment, the topography and the vegetated nature of the site. As discussed above the alignment has been chosen in order to minimise impact on trees and ecology. (49) Much of the area has been disturbed by previous industrial activity and landfill. But the area is regenerating, the habitats affected by the route are chalk grassland/scrub, ruderal vegetation on disturbed land, secondary woodland and within Ingress Park itself amenity landscape. Surveys of the ecology have been undertaken and indicate populations of grass snake, slow worm and common lizard on the grassland scrub. At least four species of bat use the area for foraging and commuting and are likely to roost in the some of the ivy covered trees in the woodland area, although the application site is only a small proportion of the woodland and trees across this area. The area was also found to contain some nationally important invertebrates, the most important of these being the brown carder bee. The ecological assessment advises that the area provides a mosaic of natural habitats due primarily due to the grassland scrub habitat, which is the regenerating landscape on the landfill area, combined with the woodland areas. The site is typical of unmanaged, brownfield sites and as a result has local nature conservation interest. (50) The report goes onto advise on mitigation for the habitats and species, measures which are supported by the Kent Wildlife Trust. The main impact associated with the road is considered to be the construction period as there would be additional short term loss of habitat due to the need for land take for construction. I agree with the assessment that restoration of the land used for construction and the appropriate landscaping of the proposed

embankments should be able to replace some of the habitat affected. However, this would depend upon the use of the calcareous substrate to be used on the embankments. The re-use of existing topsoil will also allow for seeds within it to grow and assist with re-establishment of the chalk grassland, the ecological assessment also suggests the use of chalk as surcharge on the embankments to provide more certainty for habitat re-establishment. I would suggest therefore that a condition is imposed on the planning permission requiring the submission of a landscaping scheme and details of the soil types to be used on the embankments and other disturbed land. (51) With regard to bats, the ecological assessment advises that as well as replanting trees, the inclusion of an under pass, special lighting and bat boxes would reduce the impact on bat populations. The street lighting on the final route can affect bats foraging and I consider it important that this is addressed through the design of the lighting to minimise impact. I would therefore recommend a condition requiring approval of bat mitigation details. (52) Reptiles on the development site would need to be relocated prior to construction works, but once work is completed the exclusion fencing could be removed and the reptiles will be able to invade the road embankment areas. The road could cause some barrier to movement, particularly for the grass snakes, so the ecological assessment recommends the creation of an underpass, which I consider should be supported and included within the final design. The Assessment concludes that the impact on reptiles could be negligible or possibly beneficial, if the landscaped areas are managed to prevent scrub regeneration and therefore maintain suitable grassland for reptiles. (53) The recreation of the chalk grassland habitat is also considered to be beneficial to invertebrate populations allowing them to repopulate the areas. (54) I consider that the loss of habitat in this area is regrettable but I am satisfied that the habitats can be recreated post-construction and that in the long-term the impact will be minimal. However, it is clearly important the land is remodelled and landscaped appropriately to allow the appropriate habitats to be re-created and I would seek to ensure that this achieved through condition. Impact on archaeology (55) Much of the area has been subject to quarrying but has had industrial activity which is still considered to be of interest to archaeologists and therefore KCC Archaeology require any remains to be recorded. The Archaeology report submitted with the application suggests that there is some potential that Palaeolithic remains may have survived in the undisturbed ground near the Manor Way and London Road junction. Care therefore needs to be taken with regard to piling and ground reduction and the report recommends that geo-archaeological works are undertaken within areas subject to piling, under the supervision of a recognised Palaeolithic specialist. KCC Archaeology suggest that a targeted borehole survey should be carried out to address the Palaeolithic issues. They have suggested a condition requiring approval of a programme of archaeological work and I would support the need for this in order to ensure that the archaeological potential is investigated fully. Highway Issues (56) The applicants have submitted a Transport Statement with the application. Junction testing demonstrates that the existing Ingress Park Avenue junction could operate satisfactorily in capacity terms as a single point of access serving only the permitted Ingress development. However, the junction does not provide sufficient capacity as a single point of access for the additional development proposed at Ingress Park, which includes the local centre and area of waterfront activity as well as what is likely to be in the region of some 400 additional dwellings. (57) One of my concerns about providing a second access to Ingress Park, shared by Kent Highways Services, is that the creation of a through route could lead to rat-running as vehicles seek to avoid traffic on London Road. One of the aims in designing the route has

therefore been to ensure that this is not a quick direct route for private vehicles. This has been achieved by separating vehicles from public transport at the eastern end of Ingress Park Avenue requiring private vehicles to take a more torturous route and give way to Fastrack at the junction. In addition a sharp right-angle turn at the eastern boundary also serves to slow vehicles as well as the existing roundabouts and junctions along Ingress Park Avenue. In addition, although that part of the route between the Ingress Park eastern boundary and Manor Way is currently shown as a straight route, it is intended that when the site to the south is developed, general vehicles will be directed through this site, with only Fastrack continuing on the direct route. The proposed route indicates the location of junctions into the proposed development. (58) The tortuous nature of the route also slows speeds of vehicles and where the route is fronted by houses the design speed is 25mph. This increases as the route turns away from Ingress Park but as there is no development along this part of the route I consider this acceptable and KHS have confirmed that this does not result in any detriment to highway safety. (59) The junction proposal at Manor Way/London Road is seen to be an interim solution and is not designed to support any further development on Swanscombe Peninsula. It is proposed that this will be a staggered signalised junction on London Road with Craylands Lane and a realigned Manor Way. A southbound lane on the SMoA will provide priority to eastbound public transport services. The introduction of traffic signals provides for KHS objectives to introduce traffic signals at all the key junctions along London Road in order to allow for integrated traffic management. It will also have the benefit of managing egress from Craylands Lane at peak times and providing safe pedestrian crossing. The detailed design of the junction needs to be agreed and I anticipate that the design will seek to address any problems with the existing junction and I am advised that if necessary the drainage can be upsized so that there is greater capacity for storm water in a heavy rain event. I have suggested a condition requiring these details to be agreed by the Borough Council as well as KHS in order that we can ensure the junction provides for this and meets planning aspirations. Pedestrian and cycle accessibility (60) The proposal for the Secondary Means of Access has, in my opinion, the added benefit of improving access north-south from London Road to the river for pedestrians, cyclists and those with disabilities. The revised plans shown the footpath link from Lovers Lane and DS3 being regraded so that it directly ramps down to the Secondary Means of Access route and a pedestrian/cycleway will be provided along its length. This footpath/cycleway can then connect to other routes within Ingress Park and the current proposal provides for safe crossing of Ingress Park Avenue adjacent to the Fastrack stop enabling a direct route to the proposed local centre and the River. This improved route allows access for all and, when combined with the improvements to Lovers Lane to be provided as part of the Mount Nod development package, will provide good, well-lit non-vehicular links between Swanscombe and Ingress Park. I am satisfied that this is a benefit arising out of the application but at the same time ,due to the provision of a separate more informal Public Right of Way route to the east, provides for walkers who seek a more natural environment. Public Right of Way (61) The impact of the proposed development on a Public Right of Way is a material consideration which must be taken into account. That part of DS3 which runs east-west from Manor Way is unaffected and the trees and vegetation alongside it on the chalk spine are to be unaffected by the proposal. The character of this part of the route will therefore remain unchanged. Where DS3 turns north towards the river, the new road broadly follows the line of the public right of way, but the detailed road alignment means that the PROW will need to be diverted approximately 7-10m to the east or west along part of its length. It is proposed that the public right of way will have a direct north-south route from Lovers Lane down to the new road, where it will then cross to the eastern side of the road. From here it will have a dedicated 2m wide area which can be surfaced in a permeable natural surface and will form

the edge to the development so that it relates to the informal landscaped area beyond. A shared footway/cycleway is to be provided on the western side of the new road which will provide a direct link to the local centre and the river. The Public Right of Way will therefore have a separate dedicated route. I consider that the minor diversion of the Right of Way will not prejudice users of this route and meets the Ramblers guidance which advises that a right of way should be retained as a distinct path separate from the pavements alongside the roads, whether on its existing route or through or around open spaces or woodland. In addition, the majority of the road of DS3 through the wooded area and on the chalk spine will remain unaffected by the proposal. (62) Under s.257 of the Town and Country Planning Act a local planning authority may issue an order to divert a public right of way if they are satisfied that it is necessary to do so in order to enable development to be carried out. Since the diversion is relatively minor I consider that the Public Right of Way would not be prejudiced by its diversion and recommend that Members agree to the diversion order being issued if they are minded to grant planning permission. Landscape (63) The rationalised topography at the eastern boundary of Ingress Park will I consider provide a clear boundary to development. The ground level of Ingress Park has been raised in order to ensure that the development is above flood levels. This had meant that a large retaining wall would have been required along the eastern boundary which is likely to have resulted in the removal of many of the trees that will be lost as a part of this proposal and would have resulted in an unresolved edge to the development. The road will now provide a natural boundary to the development allowing for the eastern side to be landscaped and merge with the existing natural environment. The proposal also provides the opportunity to tidy and manage the landscaped area at the eastern end of Duncannon Place at the end of Lovers Lane. Other issues (64) The changes to the proposed routing which allows for Fastrack and general vehicles to share the same route has enabled the deletion of the general traffic route which may have impacted upon existing properties in Ingress Park. The current proposal results in little change to the existing as-built road layout within the development. The new road is well away from existing properties and so will not impact on the residential amenity of existing residents. The proposal should in the long term reduce traffic on the existing part of Ingress Park Avenue as many residents from the new development on the waterfront are likely to chose the new SMoA as their route into and out of the development. (65) The proposed road lies close to the River Thames, and a Flood Risk Assessment has been prepared. The road lies behind and is protected by the flood defences by the Thames sea defences. The northern most part of the road within Ingress Park will be above the 1000 year flood level as it will be at the same level as the surrounding dwellings and the risk of flooding is therefore considered low. As the road will generate increased run-off than the existing landform, there is a requirement for Sustainable Urban Drainage systems to accommodate this run-off. The detail of these is subject to site permeability and ground water position and therefore it is suggested that a condition be imposed seeking the detailed design. (66) Planning applications for further development on the Ingress Park site are expected to be submitted in the near future and the additional development could only be granted on the basis that the Fastrack can access the development and will be provided with a through-route and also that an additional access is provided for general vehicles. If Members are minded to grant this planning permission, its delivery will be required by way of a legal obligation on any further planning permission for additional development on the site. (67) Although the land to the west of the route within Ingress Park, is currently undeveloped and occupied by the construction site, this is likely to come forward for residential development in the near future. The interface between the Secondary Means of Access and

the new development has therefore been considered in detail by the applicants and officers. A landscaping strip will be provided between the SMoA and the development that provides a degree of separation together with an access road which should enable a good level of amenity for residents and ensure that cars are discouraged from parking on the SMoA route. HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS (68) I have considered the application in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998. I am satisfied that my analysis of the issues in this case and my consequent recommendation are compatible with the Act. CONCLUSIONS (69) I consider that the proposed Secondary Means of Access provides a number of benefits, beyond simply providing a second means of access to the development, which include: a through route for Fastrack; improved pedestrian and cycle access to the east of Ingress Park and north-south between London Road and the River; and the provision of a natural boundary to the Ingress Park development resolving the issue of changing levels in this area. Although the loss of trees and impact on the natural environment is regrettable I am satisfied that this can be mitigated and that in the long term any impact will be negligible. I consider therefore that on balance the proposal is acceptable and should be encouraged to be implemented as soon as possible. (70) In addition to the recommendation to grant permission, I further recommend that Members agree to the necessary diversion order under s.257 of the Town and Country Planning Act to divert Public Right of Way DS29 being issued. RECOMMENDATION: Approval 01 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of four years

from the date of this permission. 01 In pursuance of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 02 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in

title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written specification and timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

02 To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded. 03 Before commencement of the development hereby approved a scheme for the surface

water drainage system for the development (including storage facilities where necessary) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained as approved.

03 To prevent flooding and to ensure satisfactory means of surface water drainage in

accordance with Policy B1 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan.

04 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved details of the

proposed mitigation methodology to prevent risk to the groundwater shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The work shall be carried out in full accordance with the details approved.

04 In order to prevent contamination of the underlying groundwater. 05 Prior to commencement of any construction or site clearance works on site a detailed

assessment of the extent of the construction shall be undertaken with a view to limiting the extent of works and reducing loss of habitats. The results of this assessment shall be submitted with a construction environmental management plan to the local planning authority. The details of the environmental management plan shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to any work starting on site and such work shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved.

05 In order to minimise and mitigate any impact from construction on bio-diversity habitats

in the area. 06 Prior to commencement of any construction or site clearance works a landscaping

scheme and landscape management plan, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. - The landscaping scheme shall be designed to provide appropriate habitats for reptiles, birds, invertebrates and forage opportunities for bats - Details shall be included of the soil substrate of the areas to be landscaped, - The landscape management plans should include long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas and habitat. The landscaping shall be implemented prior use of the road by general traffic or public transport (unless this falls outside of the planting season in which case it shall be implemented at the first opportunity during the following planting season) and shall be managed and maintained in accordance with the approve details. Such landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for a period of five years. Any trees, shrubs or grassed areas which die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased within this period shall be replaced within the next planting season with plants of similar species and size to that approved.

06 To mitigate habitat loss and to ensure the replacement of trees and landscaping which

contribute to the character and visual amenity of this area. 07 Before commencement of the development hereby approved (including site clearance),

details of a reptile mitigation strategy and programme of implementation shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include but be limited to, the design and location of underpass(es) for reptile use. The mitigation strategy and programme of implementation shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

07 To ensure the continued presence of reptiles on the site and to ensure that the road

does not become a barrier to their movement.

08 Before commencement of the development hereby approved (including site clearance), details of a bat mitigation strategy and monitoring scheme (to include a programme of implementation) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include (but not be limited to) surveys for bat roosts, bat boxes, provision of bat worker to be present when felling trees for potential for bat roosts, lighting design, timetable for work. The mitigation strategy, monitoring scheme and programme of implementation shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

08 To ensure the continued presence of bats both roosting and foraging through the site. 09 Before commencement of the development hereby approved (including site clearance

and delivery of associated machinery or materials) tree protection measures shall be erected around all retained/protected trees in accordance with details agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall be implemented as approved.

09 To prevent damage to the trees in the interest of the visual amenities of the area in

accordance with Policy B3 of the adopted Dartford Local Plan. 10 No tree and scrub removal shall take place between 1 March and 31 August inclusive

in any year, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 10 To ensure the protection of breeding birds. 11 During the site clearance, land forming and construction phase, the hours of working

shall be restricted to Monday to Friday 0800 hours to 1800 hours and on Saturday 0800 to 1300 hours with no work on Sundays or Public Holidays.

11 To protect the amenities of residents of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy B1

of the adopted Dartford Local Plan and Policy DD11 of the Dartford Local Plan Review Second Deposit Draft.

12 Effective wheel washing plant and equipment shall be installed on the site in

accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter maintained in full working order until the development has been completed and no vehicles shall leave the site until their wheels, chassis and external bodywork have been effectively cleaned and washed free of earth, mud, clay, gravel, stones or any other similar substance.

12 In the interests of amenity and highway safety in accordance with Policy B1of the

adopted Dartford Local Plan. 13 If any infill material is to be brought onto the site, only naturally occurring rocks, sub-

soils and soils (including those containing <20% organic matter) and recycled construction and/or demolition materials (but excluding those containing bricks and concrete >70mm, metal, plasterboard, asbestos cement or other contaminated materials) shall be used. This shall be from a certified source to ensure that it is not contaminated in terms of its intended end use. The relevant Certification Documents shall be sent to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) prior to any development

commencing on the site. No development shall commence until the LPA has given written approval of the documents. No sludges or slurrys may be used.

Analytical evidence shall be provided to verify imported soils are suitable for the proposed end use. This will require characterisation of the source and target sites in accordance with BS ISO 15176:2002 and subsequent relevant soil analyses. The sampling protocols and soil guideline values to be used for assessment of suitability will be dependant on the source of the soil and the proposed use of the target site and this shall be agreed with the LPA prior to any development commencing on the site. As a minimum, for large volumes of homogenous natural soils for use in non-sensitive areas, such as commercial end uses, sampling frequency shall be at least one per thousand cubic metres (1:1000m3). Soils for use in sensitive areas, such as domestic gardens, and where imported soils are less homogenous, the sampling frequency shall be greater (i.e. up to one per hundred and fifty cubic metres (1:150m3)).

A closure report shall be submitted once remediation works have been completed. This shall include results of all sampling undertaken and certification of imported soils. This condition shall not be discharged until a closure report has been submitted to and approved by the LPA.

Ref 1. R&D Publication CLR8 (2002) 'Potential contaminants for the assessment of land' (DEFRA and the Environment Agency)

Ref 2. BS ISO 15176:2002 'Soil quality - characterisation of excavated soil and other materials intended for re-use.'

13 In the interests of public safety and in order to prevent the pollution of the groundwater. 14 The installation of street furniture along the route (including lighting, railings, bus

shelters, seating, bollards) shall be implemented in accordance with details which shall first have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

14 In the interest of visual amenity and to ensure that there is no impact on the presence

of bats. 15 The road hereby approved shall not be available for use by general traffic until such

time as the signalised junction to Manor Way and London road is completed in accordance with plans submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority. Such plans should also address the surface water drainage issue.

15 In the interests of highway safety and to ensure the satisfactory drainage of the

junction. INFORMATIVES 01 The diversion of Public Right of Way DS29 will require an order under s.257 of the

Town and Country Planning Act. The developer should contact the Local Planning Authority in the first instance to discuss the process. It will be necessary to secure this order before the development hereby permitted can be implemented.

02 Although the ecological assessment advises that there are no water voles on the

application site, the drainage system for the access road may drain into the marshes or watercourses where water voles are known. For the avoidance of doubt it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the Wildlife and Countryside Act is

complied with and thus that the water voles are protected. 03 Kent Wildlife Trust run a Roadside Nature Reserve scheme, which may be appropriate

for this development. It is recommended that KWT are contacted for advice on the design and management of the roadside landscaping for this development.

04 For the avoidance of doubt the Environment Agency have advised that they will object

to the discharge of surface water run-off to ground, due to the potential risks from contamination of the underlying groundwater environment. Any Sustainable Urban Drainage system will therefore need to be fully lined/impermeable.

05 The applicant is advised that it is an offence to intentionally kill, injure or capture bats,

deliberately disturb bats (whether in roost or not), recklessly disturb roosting bats or obstruct access to their roots, damage or destroy bat roosts.

37

49

18

25

5

EMPIRE W

ALK

6 to 17

25.4m

MP 20 .5

Tavern

18.0m

Newton House

18.9m

Works

38

10.6m

F FCRAYLANDS

7.6m

1

1

12 to 24

7

43 to 51

1

FF

MHW

REED COURT

Shi ngl e

45

Pat h

37

12.5m

BM 5.47m

Drain

LB

5b

WAKEFIELD ROAD

28

12

16a

4a

Nelson Ho use

43

84

Tank

Path

12.1m

CROSS

28

13

10

14

Mooring Posts

P

PALLADIAN CIRCUS

15

27

INGRESS PARK AVENUE

23

6

18

Mud

Sand and Shingle

2

1

DUNCANNON PLACE

2

25

REED COUR

T

19

8

Ward Bdy

15.8m

Dr ain

Drain

Sil os

Drain

6

1 t o 18

3

(PH)

50

22.9m 1a

44

Ingress Gardens

CR

(disused )

7

11

MP 20.75

19

11

Mean Low W

ater

2

4 to 7

20

56

Dolp hin

Paper Mi lls

EMPIRE W

ALK

11

39

Ward Bdy

FF

FF

Track

Tanks

Tan k

Track

Works

Swanscombe Marsh es

WB

33

28.2m

41

24

27.4m

8

1

1

25 t o 33

8

1

8

20

5

BM 25.00m

20.9m

32

1c

Track

Pit

97

WB

SWANSCOMBE

Ward Bdy

9

24

15

23

Sand and Shingle

PALLADIAN CIRCUS

75

ST. CLEMENTS ROAD

11

80

6

20

7

Path

11.0m

Drain

Tip

Drain

Drain

Centre

16

1 to 8

Thamesview

DW

36

18

75

1 t o 39

FF

BM 22.19m

Und

1 to 8

49

90

Shelt er

Shelter

27

Sta

18

21

Swanscombe Siding

Tank

12

1

Ward Bdy

1

Sand and Shingle

Sand and Shingle

Mean Low Water

Path

5.1m

FF

REED C

OURT

13.7m

El Sub St a

WB

11.6m

Sub Sta

Community

El Sub St a

8

24

DIAL CLOSE

24

LB

24.7m

Manse

LOVER'S LANE

26

1

37

SL

LONDON

ROAD

SWANSCOMBE

BM 15.01m

LANE

CRAYLANDS SQU

ARE

17

Jetty

31to

EMPIRE WALK

68

El Sub St a

52

17

21

Ward Bdy

MP

57

Path

Drain

Pond

21

42 to 44

45

5a

34 to 42

4c

4c

RE ED COURT

7

KNOCKHAL L ROAD

1b

Silos

Tunn el

Tunnel

ElSub

22

20

60

66

8 to 17

Dolphin

REED COURT

Mud

16

Mud

43

Ward Bdy

LOVER'S LANE

FB

BM 1.92m

Drain

4.0m

MANOR WAY

3.7m

El

7

6

13

9 to 11

26

5

House

25.0m

Colli ngwood

65

El Sub Sta

Ingress

BM 13.5

3m

7.7m

Depot

Tank

812

16

3

5

Bollard

Dolphin

El Sub St a

4.6m

Wharf

15

31

Ward Bdy

27

Shingle

Drain

Silos

Works

Drain

Swanscombe Marshes

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown Copyright. 2007Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Dartford Borough Council 100025870 2007

�

Application No:: 08/01543/FUL

Address : Land Between Junction Manor Way And London Road And Ingress Park Avenue Ingress Park

Date: 23 October 2009 Scale: 1:3;500