6.1.1 The Borough Council has adopted the following Local Plan aims with regard to rural development:

(i) to identify those locations in rural areas where development is appropriate;

(ii) to facilitate the diversification of the rural economy subject to environmental safeguards;

(iii) to seek the redevelopment of rural employment sites which cause harm to amenity;

(iv) to minimise adverse impact of development in rural areas;

(v) to protect and enhance the vitality and viability of local rural centres and promote the provision of local rural services.

6.2.1 There is a wide variety in the scale and nature of rural settlements in the Plan area, ranging from small rural towns and villages to hamlets and small groups of buildings. The policy context for the consideration of development at different types of rural settlement is set out in PPG2 and PPG7 and in the Structure Plan rural settlement policies. However, it is for Local Plans to identify those settlements in their area to which different policies should apply.

6.2.2 Structure Plan Policies S2, ENV1 and RS5 seek to restrict development in the countryside in order to conserve its character. The main focus for development in rural areas, other than at Leybourne Grange and on the East Bank of the Medway, is therefore within the confines of existing rural settlements. Settlements where development could be achieved without detriment to the character of the settlement or the countryside are identified below. The confines of the built-up areas where development may be permitted are generally defined as being the consolidated built extent of the rural settlements. Locations where development, even of a minor scale, would be detrimental to the character of the local area have been excluded. The following specific criteria have been applied:

(i) wherever possible, boundaries follow clearly definable boundaries on the ground such as fences, hedges or streams;

(ii) open space (including school playing fields) at the edge of settlements has generally been excluded. School buildings may have been excluded depending on their location relative to other built development;

(iii) areas of low density sporadic development at the edge of a settlement have been excluded;

(iv) extensive grounds to the side or rear of individual houses on the edge of settlements abutting the countryside have been excluded where there is no clear boundary creating a sense of enclosure, or where development would lead to an adverse change in the character of the area by, for example, creating ribbon development into the rural area.

6.2.3 The Local Plan identifies rural settlements which should be treated as villages and small rural towns for the purposes of applying Structure Plan Policy RS2. At those rural settlements, expansion is restricted but minor development, such as infilling in suitable locations within their built confines, may be appropriate. The Structure Plan defines infilling as the completion of an otherwise substantially built-up frontage by the filling of a narrow gap capable usually of taking one or two dwellings only. It also advises that the assessment of what might constitute 'minor' development needs to be determined in relation to the size of the settlement and could be within the range of 5 to 10 dwellings at larger settlements. Small scale businesses will be permitted within and adjoining the confines of settlements under the terms of Structure Plan Policy RS4 where they are appropriate to the scale of the settlement and will not cause undue detriment to the amenity and character of the settlement or its setting.

POLICY P6/1

The following settlements are defined as rural settlements to which Structure Plan Policies RS2 and RS4 apply, where minor residential development such as infilling, or small scale business development, is appropriate:

(a) Addington Clearway;	(j) Hadlow;
(b) Birling;	(k) Hale Street;
(c) Blue Bell Hill;	(l) Hildenborough;
(d) Borough Green;	(m) Mereworth;
(e) Burham;	(n) Platt;
(f) Crouch;	(o) Ryarsh;
(g) East Peckham;	(p) Wateringbury;
(h) Eccles;	(q) West Peckham;
(i) Golden Green;	(r) Wrotham Heath;

The confines of these rural settlements for the purposes of applying all relevant Structure and Local Plan policies are defined on the Proposals Map.

6.2.4 Structure Plan Policy RS3(a) requires Local Plans to identify rural settlements where new residential development in excess of minor development (referred to in Structure Policy RS2) within or adjoining the built confines is appropriate. The following rural settlements have potential for such development which is provided through the housing allocations identified in Policies P2/5 and P5/1(d). Except for the allocated sites, residential development should be restricted to minor development under Structure Plan Policy RS2 in order to protect the rural character of settlements and avoid urbanisation.

POLICY P6/2

The following settlements are defined as rural settlements to which Structure Plan Policies RS2, RS3(a) and RS4 apply where identified opportunities exist for residential development in excess of minor development or redevelopment, and where small-scale business development is appropriate:

(a) East Malling;

(b) Wouldham.

Apart from the sites specifically identified for residential development under the provisions of Policies P2/5 and P5/1, development will not be permitted at these rural settlements unless it accords with the terms of Structure Plan Policies RS2 and RS4. The confines of these rural settlements for the purposes of applying all relevant Structure and Local Plan Policies are defined on the Proposals Map.

6.2.5 Structure Plan Policy RS3(b) seeks to protect those villages and small rural towns which are of such exceptional conservation importance that the primary planning policy towards all new residential development, including minor development or redevelopment, will be the conservation and enhancement of their special character. Within the Borough, there are many historic rural settlements, often with Conservation Areas protecting the character of the central historic core of the settlement. However, there are eight villages which, taken as a whole, are of such significance for conservation and tourism that any future development within their built confines will be considered in relation to the impact it would have on the conservation and enhancement of their special character.

POLICY P6/3

The following are identified as rural settlements to which Structure Plan Policies RS2, RS3(b) and RS4 apply, where minor residential development or redevelopment, or small scale business developments appropriate in principle subject to all such proposals conserving and enhancing the special character of the settlement:

(a) Addington;

(b) Aylesford;

(c) Ightham;

(d) Offham;

(e) Plaxtol;

(f) Trottiscliffe;

(g) West Malling;

(h) Wrotham.

The confines of these rural settlements for the purposes of applying all relevant Structure and Local Plan policies are defined on the Proposals Map.

6.2.6 PPG2 advises that existing villages in the Green Belt can be treated in one of three ways. Where villages are considered suitable to accommodate limited development (more than infilling) they should be inset, that is, excluded from the Green Belt. This is the approach which has been adopted for the settlements identified in Policies P6/1 and P6/3 above. Where no new development is proposed beyond that appropriate in the Green Belt, villages should remain washed over by the Green Belt (see paragraph 6.2.8). The third approach is that other smaller settlements in the Green Belt may be identified for infilling only where this would not have an adverse effect on the character of the village concerned. The Local Plan therefore identifies villages which are washed over by the Green Belt but where infill development may be permitted.

POLICY P6/4

The following are identified as settlements within the Green Belt where residential infill, that is the completion of an otherwise substantially built-up frontage by the filling of a narrow gap capable usually of taking one or two dwellings only, may be permitted within the boundaries as defined on the Proposals Map, subject to no adverse effect on the character of the settlement or on the openness and function of the Green Belt:

(a) Dunks Green;

(b) Fairseat;

(c) Pinesfield Lane, Trottiscliffe;

(d) Snoll Hatch, East Peckham.

6.2.7 A number of the rural settlements have a distinctive character by virtue of being traditional linear street villages. It is important that any development respects this character and does not interrupt the building line at the street frontage, which contributes to the linear character by, for example, setting back new buildings or orientating them in a way which is not compatible with the surrounding building form.

POLICY P6/5

Development which may be acceptable under the terms of Policies P6/1, P6/3 and P6/4 will only be permitted where it respects the special linear street character of the following rural settlements:

(a) Birling;

(b) Dunks Green;

(c) Golden Green;

(d) Mereworth;

(e) Plaxtol;

(f) Snoll Hatch.

In addition, development which would result in the amalgamation of the separately identified parts of Golden Green or Mereworth will not be permitted.

6.2.8 PPG7 advises that new house building and other new development in the open countryside, away from established settlements, should be strictly controlled, and this is reflected in the terms of Structure Plan Policy RS5. There are a number of other rural housing groups in the countryside, often very small in size or number of dwellings, and some villages such as Stansted, Shipbourne and parts of West Peckham and Fairseat, which comprise spacious development with large open areas between individual buildings or building groups. In such cases even minor development could not be integrated successfully within the existing settlement without resulting in significant change in the character of the settlement, harming the open character of the countryside, or being contrary to the purposes of the Green Belt. In these cases the housing groups or villages are not specifically identified as having opportunities for further development and the forms of development which may be acceptable will be restricted to those appropriate under the terms of PPG2, PPG7 and Structure Plan Policy RS5.

6.2.9 The estate at Kits Coty originated before the Second World War from the sale of plots by developers for house building, leisure or agricultural purposes. It is still rural in appearance, being only partially built up, with many vacant plots, some substandard buildings and predominantly unmade roads. It lies in a prominent location on the scarp of the North Downs within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. In 1977 the Borough Council resolved that applications for new development should be refused, but that no objection would be raised in principle to the replacement within their existing curtilage (subject to satisfactory siting, design and means of access) of existing dwellings where it was considered that an established residential use existed as at 1October 1976. Notwithstanding the terms of Structure Plan Policy RS5 (which allows for the rebuilding or modest extension of a dwelling currently in residential use in an appropriate location) the following policy will apply:

POLICY P6/6

No development will be permitted within the area as shown on the Proposals Map at Kits Coty other than the rebuilding, alteration or extension of a dwelling considered to have an existing residential use on 1st October 1976, as defined in Policy Annex PA6/6. Any such proposals would then be considered in the light of Policy P6/10.

6.3 Rural Housing

Rural Affordable Housing

6.3.1 The Borough Council has adopted a policy for affordable housing in rural areas. The successful implementation of the policy depends on sites coming forward where the owners are willing to release them for development at well below market value in order that this benefit can be passed on to the occupiers of the dwellings. This process will necessarily involve the consideration of sites not normally viewed as suitable sites for open market housing. However, for the Borough Council to be satisfied that the exceptional release of such sites is justified, a range of criteria must be met and these are set out in Policy P6/7. Legal agreements will be sought to prevent the loss of affordable housing through re-sale on the open market. The use of open market housing on inappropriate sites to cross-subsidise rural affordable housing is fundamentally at odds with the principles of the policy.

6.3.2 The policy requires a comprehensive appraisal to be carried out to establish whether there is a genuine local need existing within the Parish. No particular form of survey is prescribed: the onus is on the applicant to substantiate the local needs case in such a way that satisfies the policy criteria. Any proposals that are realised will be counted as additional to normal Structure Plan housing requirements. Proposals for sites outside villages, within the Green Belt, will need to be justified by very special circumstances and treated as departures from the Local Plan in accordance with Policy P2/16.

POLICY P6/7

1. Development to meet a need for rural affordable housing may exceptionally be permitted on:

(1) sites not covered by Green Belt policy, adjoining rural settlements;

(2) on sites within rural settlements, washed over by Green Belt policy.

Proposals for development of sites within the Green Belt, outside existing settlements will be subject to Policy P2/16. 2. Development proposals will only be permitted where all of the following considerations are satisfied:

(1) there is a genuine local need for affordable housing existing within the Parish or, where appropriate, in adjacent Parishes as defined by the categories of need set out below and verified by means of a comprehensive appraisal;

(2) the identified local need arises within an area remote from any major urban area and cannot be met by any other means;

(3) the proposal is of a size and type suitable to meet the identified local need and will be available at an appropriate affordable cost commensurate with the results of the appraisal;

(4) the proposed site is considered suitable for such purposes by virtue of its relationship in scale and siting to an existing village and its services, its proximity to public transport, and the absence of any adverse countryside conservation, environmental, or highway impact;

(5) the initial and subsequent occupancy is controlled through planning conditions and agreements as appropriate to ensure that accommodation remains available to meet the purposes for which it was permitted.

3. In assessing local needs, regard will be taken of households otherwise unable to gain access to existing local accommodation suited to their needs at an affordable cost (the onus being on the household to prove they cannot afford to buy locally at current house prices within the limits of the disposable income available to them) and that fall within one or more of the following categories:

(1) those in the Parish currently in accommodation unsuited to their circumstances for physical, medical, or social reasons and which is incapable of being improved. “Improvement” in this context means that otherwise achievable with grant assistance towards repairs, adaptations to property for disabled people, etc;

(2) those who are dependants of households who have been resident in the Parish either for a continuous period of three years or alternatively any five years out of the last ten;

(3) those who have been members of households currently living in the Parish and who have recognised local connections, ie. having family resident in the area for a minimum of ten years;

(4) those employed full-time in the Parish on other than a short term basis or those who will be taking up such employment there, or those who provide an important service requiring them to live locally.

6.3.3 The character and appearance of the countryside needs to be protected. The cost of providing services to isolated dwellings also needs to be avoided and new housing will normally be confined within settlement boundaries. However, there are acknowledged cases of special need when accommodation is required to meet the demands of farming and forestry which makes it essential for one or more of the people engaged in such activities to live at, or very close to, their place of work.

6.3.4 Proposed development must comply with other relevant policies of the Plan, with particular regard to the need to avoid visual intrusion by appropriate scale and design and to protect wildlife and wildlife habitats. Where a new dwelling is to be permitted under this policy, the Planning Authority will impose a condition restricting its initial and successive occupation to a person solely or mainly working, or last working in the locality in agriculture or in forestry, or a widow or widower of such a person and to any resident dependants.

POLICY P6/8

1. Development of a new permanent agricultural or forestry dwelling will only be permitted if:

(1) evidence is submitted which demonstrates that the needs of the farm or forestry enterprise are such that it is essential for an agricultural or forestry worker for whom this is their primary employment to live at, or very close to, their place of work;

(2) evidence is submitted which demonstrates that the unit and the agricultural/forestry activity have been established for at least three years, have been profitable for at least one of those three years, are currently financially sound, and have a clear prospect of remaining so;

(3) there has been no prior disposal of either agricultural or forestry dwellings which could have been used to meet this need, or buildings suitable for conversion to a dwelling to meet this need;

(4) there is no suitable alternative residential accommodation available in nearby towns and villages;

(5) there are no existing buildings which could reasonably be converted or adapted to meet this need;

(6) the size of the dwelling is commensurate with the established functional requirement and is suitably located to meet the identified functional need; and

(7) the dwelling is appropriately sited in terms of its visual impact, where possible being well related to existing farm buildings or other dwellings.

2. Where criterion 1(2) cannot, for the time being, be met, development of a temporary dwelling may be permitted where:

(1) evidence is submitted which demonstrates that there is a firm intention and ability to develop the enterprise concerned and that it has been planned on a sound financial basis; and

(2) all the other above criteria are met.

POLICY P6/9

The removal of agricultural or forestry occupancy conditions will only be permitted where conclusive evidence is provided that there is no longer a need for the dwelling to be retained for occupation by someone solely, mainly or last working in agriculture or forestry in the general locality. This should include evidence to show that determined but unsuccessful attempts have been made for a at a price which takes account of the occupancy condition.

6.3.5 Proposals for the rebuilding, alteration or extension of existing residential properties in the countryside may be acceptable, even within the Green Belt. Within rural areas, proposals need to be considered particularly carefully to ensure they will not harm the rural character and amenity of the area or adversely affect the purpose and function of the Green Belt. In particular, it is important that when rural buildings are converted to residential use, proposals are treated comprehensively in order for the full impact of the proposal to be properly assessed at that time. As such, proposals for the subsequent extension of such buildings will not normally be considered acceptable. Policy P4/12 sets out the general criteria against which proposals for residential extensions will be considered.

POLICY P6/10

1. Proposals for the rebuilding, alteration or extension of dwellings and curtilage buildings in the rural area will only be permitted where the scale, bulk, size, massing, location and detailed design of any development results in no adverse impact on the character of the site, its setting, the wider rural landscape or rural or residential amenity. Extensions to dwellings will also be subject to Policy P4/12.

2. In the Green Belt, in addition to the tests set out in paragraph 1 above, proposals for a new dwelling which is significantly larger than the dwelling it replaces or an extension which is disproportionate to the size of the original building will not be permitted and will be subject to the terms of Policy P2/16.

3. In respect of dwellings which were created as a result of the conversion of a rural building, proposals at a later date to extend the building will not normally be acceptable.

6.3.6 There are two existing official sites at Coldharbour, Aylesford and at Teston Road, West Malling, and a tolerated site at Hoathwood. An annual count of Gypsies living in the Borough is carried out by the Borough Council.

6.3.7 Circular 1/94 advises that gypsy sites constitute development which would be inappropriate within the Green Belt, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Suitable locations are most likely to be found outside settlements but within a reasonable distance of shops, schools and other facilities, but should avoid encroachment into the open countryside. The best and most versatile agricultural land and encroachment into the open countryside should also be avoided. The following policy will be applied in the consideration of any proposals for additional gypsy accommodation:

POLICY P6/11

Proposals for accommodation for gypsies will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that:

(1) the proposed occupants are gypsies, having a nomadic way of life, residing in or resorting to the Borough;

(2) there are no overriding landscape, agricultural, conservation, highway or amenity objections to the site.

The location of the site should provide reasonable accessibility to shops, schools and other facilities. Within the Green Belt proposals will be subject to the terms of Policy P2/16.

6.4.1 The diversification of the rural economy is advocated through national policy in PPG7 as an appropriate response to the changing levels of agricultural production. Structure Plan Policy ED5 provides for rural diversification to support the viability of farm businesses subject to transport, landscape and other planning considerations. Diversification can include new leisure uses, rural recreation and rural tourism, which includes new tourist attractions and sites for transit camping and caravanning facilities. Care must be taken to ensure that the open character of the countryside is not prejudiced through prolific or insensitive development, particularly within the Green Belt, and that there is no adverse impact on the local environment or amenity of residents.

6.4.2 The importance of the countryside in providing for sport, recreation and tourist facilities is recognised in PPGs 17 and 21, but only in so far as those facilities are compatible with the natural beauty, landscape diversity and nature conservation interest of the countryside. Structure Plan Policy SR2 states that for sports and recreation facilities in the countryside, any built development should be small in scale, ancillary to an outdoor recreation use, unobtrusively located and not harmful to landscape wildlife or rural amenity. Proposals within the Green Belt which do not fall within one of the categories of appropriate development as defined in PPG2 will need to be considered against Policy P2/16. PPG7 advises that in considering such proposals, the loss of part of an agricultural holding can have important implications for the remainder of the unit, and that the effect of severance and fragmentation upon the farm and its structure may be a relevant consideration. Structure Plan Policy TO3 identifies a particular opportunity for increased provision of touring caravan and camping facilities with high quality on-site facilities well related to strategic route corridors.

POLICY P6/12

Within the rural areas, proposals for new recreation, leisure or tourist uses which involve a substantial element of built development will not be permitted. Proposals for such facilities of a predominantly open nature will be permitted where:

(1) proposals, either individually or cumulatively, preserve or enhance existing important landscape features, particularly the special characteristics in areas of identified landscape importance, and are in harmony with the rural appearance of the countryside;

(2) as appropriate, full use is made of existing buildings within the land holding before new built development is proposed;

(3) the amount of any associated new built development is directly related to the proposed use, small in scale and the minimum required to serve that use, and unobtrusively sited and designed so as to avoid any material harm to the countryside;

(4) the proposal, either individually or cumulatively with other proposals in the vicinity, avoids the irreversible loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and suitable measures are adopted to maintain the agricultural potential of the land or generally make the best use of damaged land;

(5) the proposal does not result in the fragmentation and/or severance of an agricultural land holding creating a non-viable agricultural unit;

(6) full account is taken of any nature conservation interests and wildlife habitats present within the site and suitable provision is made for their protection and enhancement;

(7) the proposal is adequately served by the highway network and avoids off-site highway improvements that would have an unacceptable impact on the character of rural lanes and the countryside;

(8) suitable provision is made for the protection and, where practicable, the enhancement of the existing rights of way network which may be affected by the proposals, with full regard to the safety of users;

(9) there is no unacceptable adverse impact arising from lighting, traffic generation, activity at unsocial hours or excessive noise.

Within the Green Belt proposals for inappropriate development will be subject to Policy P2/16.

6.4.3 The keeping of horses and horse riding is an increasingly popular recreational pursuit. Unless it involves nothing more than horses grazing on the land, the use of agricultural land for the keeping of horses for recreational purposes will constitute a material change of use requiring planning permission. Planning permission will also be required where the keeping of horses involves the use of a residential curtilage for purposes not related to the residential use, or the extension of such a curtilage. The keeping of horses in connection with a business use such as a stud farm or riding school also requires planning permission. It is important to consider carefully proposals for such facilities in order to avoid an unacceptable adverse impact on the character and appearance of the countryside, residential amenity and the highway network. It should be recognised that damage can be caused to the landscape through unsuitable fencing, jumps, bark-stripping and over-use of bridleways. It is also important that regard is had to the welfare of the animals in considering proposals for the keeping or stabling of horses. The following policy will apply to proposals within built up areas as well as in the countryside:

POLICY P6/13

Proposals for the use of land for the keeping of horses or the erection of stables will be permitted provided that there is:

(1) no adverse impact on the character of the countryside either individually or cumulatively in terms of the design and location of buildings and other structures, or inadequate or inappropriate landscaping or screening;

(2) no adverse impact on residential amenity due to smells, excessive noise, lighting, traffic generation or activity at unsocial hours;

(3) no hazard to road safety.

Proposals should be well located in relation to the bridleway network, incorporate suitable and adequate land for the exercise of horses, and incorporate appropriate measures for storage and disposal of manure, bedding and other waste. In the rural areas, proposals should also meet the tests of Policy P6/12.

6.4.4 There are often opportunities for reusing or adapting existing rural buildings for new uses, whether their former use was for agriculture or for some other purpose. In order to be considered for reuse a building must be of a form, bulk and general design which is in keeping with its surroundings. It must be structurally sound and must normally be capable of conversion to the proposed new use without extension or significant alteration. The proposed change of use must be acceptable in terms of environmental, traffic and other planning considerations. The prominence of a site can be important in terms of its impact on the open countryside, for example in views from roads and footpaths. Surveys should be carried out to ensure there are no protected species in the buildings. Policy P3/4 deals with species protected by law, and conditions to safeguard them will be imposed on a planning permission as appropriate.

6.4.5 Reuse can be especially valuable in securing the long-term protection of buildings of architectural or historic value, particularly Listed Buildings, and other buildings which contribute to the character of the countryside, so long as the proposed new use does not require alteration to the building structure which would harm the special character of the building.

6.4.6 The reuse of rural buildings for commercial, industrial, recreation and tourist uses can assist with diversification of the rural economy and provide jobs in rural areas. It can also provide accommodation which is often cheaper than that in urban areas, and thus particularly useful for new firms.

6.4.7 However the conversion of rural buildings to dwellings needs to be considered with particular care. Such conversions often have minimal positive impact on the rural economy and potentially have a greater adverse impact on the character of rural areas. Residential conversions often require more extensive alterations to the fabric of a rural building than a commercial, recreation or tourist use and the impact which conversion would have on the rural character of a building in terms of such aspects as window openings, doors, conservatories and domestic paraphernalia needs to be carefully considered. This is particularly important when dealing with rural buildings of architectural or historic value, especially Listed Buildings. The creation of a residential curtilage around a newly converted building can have a harmful effect on the character of the countryside, particularly in areas of high quality landscape.

POLICY P6/14

Proposals for the reuse of existing rural buildings for commercial, industrial, recreation or tourist development will be permitted where:

(1) the building is of a form, bulk and general design which is in keeping with its surroundings;

(2) the building is of permanent, substantial and sound construction and capable of conversion without major or complete reconstruction;

(3) any alterations proposed as part of the conversion are in keeping with the rural character of the building in terms of detailed design and materials;

(4) the proposed use is acceptable in terms of residential and rural amenity, highway impacts and the use of land surrounding the buildings, and can be accommodated without requiring the erection of ancillary buildings. If appropriate, conditions will be imposed removing permitted development rights;

(5) the proposed use does not result in the fragmentation and/or severance of an agricultural land holding creating a non-viable agricultural unit;

(6) there is no adverse impact on the rural character or appearance of the area, both locally and in wider views, particularly within areas of identified landscape importance, and any landscaping scheme for the site is appropriate to a rural location;

(7) in the case of buildings of architectural or historic interest, conversion would not:

(i) be detrimental to the architectural or historic character of the building, including any archaeological or technological interest it may have, its group value with any other historic buildings, or its setting; or

(ii) result in the loss of important features relating to the original fabric, the external character of the building or its internal spatial qualities.

Within the Green Belt proposals will be subject to Policy P2/16. Permission will not be given where the proposed use, and the use or appearance of the land surrounding the buildings, would have a materially greater impact than the present use on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it. Proposals affecting Listed Buildings will be subject to Policy P4/1. Within Conservation Areas, proposals will be subject to Policies P4/4 and P4/5.

POLICY P6/15

Proposals for the conversion of existing rural buildings to residential use will not be permitted where there is any conflict with the same terms as Policy P6/14, or where:

(1) the proposed use cannot be accommodated without extensive alteration, rebuilding and/or extension of the building;

(2) the proposal would result in an unacceptable residential environment arising from continuing agricultural operations nearby;

(3) the scale and nature of the proposed residential curtilage around the building, particularly in respect of domestic paraphernalia, results in an adverse impact on the rural character or appearance of the countryside.

POLICY P6/16

1.Where rural buildings have been converted to a commercial, industrial, recreation or tourist use, subsequent proposals requiring planning permission to extend such buildings will not normally be acceptable unless exceptionally justified.

2. Where proposals for the use of an agricultural building for any other use could lead to it being replaced elsewhere by a new agricultural building or buildings, and where this is likely to be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt or conflict seriously with policies for the protection of the built, natural or cultural environment, conditions will be imposed removing permitted development rights for such buildings.

6.5.1 PPG2 advises that where major development exists within the Green Belt, the Local Plan may identify such sites and apply appropriate policies to them. There are a number of major developed sites within the Green Belt which it is appropriate to treat in this way. Such sites fall broadly into two categories. The first category includes sites where the existing use(s) cause no significant harm to amenity and where it is intended that such use(s) will remain largely undisturbed over the plan period. Further infilling within such sites is considered acceptable in principle and will not prejudice the Green Belt. The second category includes those existing sites which have potential for redevelopment. In the main, these sites have been identified in the Plan because they are causing or have the potential to cause harm to residential or rural amenity and where redevelopment to a less intrusive use would secure environmental benefits. Where a site has been identified as being most appropriate for infill, this does not necessarily preclude redevelopment, or vice-versa. All proposals will be considered in the light of the relevant criteria contained in PPG2 Annex C.

6.5.2 There are a number of established sites within the Green Belt where further limited infilling by way of extensions to existing buildings and new small buildings would give rise to no specific harm to the character of the countryside provided that development is limited in height to that of existing buildings and no major increase in the developed proportion of the site is proposed. Such uses are generally well established and provide important sources of local employment. In addition to a number of employment uses, Policy P6/17 also identifies Hadlow College as a major established education use within the Green Belt where modest infill development under the terms of PPG2 can be accommodated without harming the purpose or function of the Green Belt. The College provides an important educational and community facility within the Local Plan area as well as being a major employer. Whilst PPG2 makes it clear that development by higher education establishments is subject to the same controls as other development within the Green Belt, it states that it is Government policy to encourage more people to undertake higher education and an appropriate policy context is therefore provided by the Local Plan.

POLICY P6/17

Within the following areas, as defined on the Proposals Map, further limited infilling directly related to the existing use(s) of the site will be permitted where such development does not, individually or cumulatively with other development, result in a major increase in the developed proportion of the site, exceed the height of existing buildings, or lead to any greater impact on the Green Belt than existing development:

(a) Platt Industrial Estate;

(b) Long Pond Works, Borough Green;

(c) Works, south of Cricketts Farm, Ightham;

(d) Former Ryarsh Brickworks;

(e) The Alders, Mereworth;

(f) East of Tonbridge Road, Little Mill, East Peckham;

(g) Hadlow College.

Proposals for development within these sites which do not accord with the above criteria will be subject to Policy P2/16.

6.5.3 There are certain sites within the Green Belt which give rise, or have the potential to give rise, to significant conflict with residential or rural amenity, particularly in terms of visual intrusion, traffic generation (particularly heavy goods vehicles) and noise levels. Redevelopment of such sites is therefore to be favoured for an environmentally beneficial use. It must be emphasised that the Borough Council has no intention of statutorily discontinuing these uses or revoking their permissions. It is merely indicating their suitability in principle for redevelopment should the opportunity arise. Each policy area identified as suitable for redevelopment is referred to as a "site", even where several separate uses and ownerships are included. Any proposal for the redevelopment of a site which does not achieve sufficient benefits in terms of improvements to residential or rural amenity will be treated as a departure to the Plan.

POLICY P6/18

Proposals for the redevelopment of the sites listed below and at Leybourne Grange (Policy P5/1(b)) will only be permitted where an overall improvement in the environment is achieved, and:

(1) they have no greater, and where possible less, impact than the existing development on the openness of the Green Belt and purposes of including land in the Green Belt;

(2) they contribute to the achievement of the objectives for the use of land in the Green Belt;

(3) the proposed coverage of the site by buildings (ie. the footprint) is no larger than, and the development does not exceed the height of, the original buildings unless occupying a larger footprint would achieve a reduction in height which would benefit visual amenity;

(4) the character and dispersal of the proposed development compared with the existing use (including the cumulative impact of outdoor domestic paraphernalia) has regard to the main features of the landscape, appropriately integrates new development with its surroundings and has no detrimental impact on the openness of the Green Belt;

(5) all Listed Buildings are retained and integrated sensitively within the proposal, subject to the terms of Policy P4/1;

(6) for those sites not well related to the primary or secondary road network, there is no increase in the overall level of traffic generated by the site, both peak and daily flows, and a significant reduction in heavy goods vehicle movements unless it can be demonstrated that the level and nature of traffic generated can be satisfactorily accommodated without conflict with residential or rural amenity and will not prejudice highway safety;

(7) there is an improvement to visual amenity and adequate provision is made for the maintenance of landscaped areas where appropriate.

In addition to the above criteria, the site specific caveats identified below will also apply:

(a) South of London Road, Addington: proposals should provide for a visual enhancement of the site, a rationalisation of the existing accesses onto the A20, and include appropriate measures to ameliorate road traffic and railway noise;

(b) Fencing Works, Long Mill Lane, Platt: proposals should achieve a reduction in traffic generation on rural lanes, a visual enhancement of the site, and investigate and provide for treatment of any contaminated land;

(c) East of Mill Lane, Basted, Platt: proposals should achieve a reduction in traffic generation, and investigate and provide for treatment of any contaminated land

(d) Nepicar Area: East, London Road, Wrotham: proposals for a sensitive redevelopment should incorporate a high quality of design and appropriate scale of development sympathetic to the landscape setting in order to integrate the development into the area, with particular emphasis on high quality roofscape treatment to protect long distance views. Satisfactory access must be provided including rationalisation of existing access points, and appropriate measures should be taken within the site to ameliorate road traffic noise;

(e) Nepicar Area, West, London Road, Wrotham: proposals for a sensitive redevelopment should incorporate a high quality of design and appropriate scale of development sympathetic to the landscape setting in order to integrate the development into the area, with particular emphasis on high quality roofscape treatment to protect long distance views. Satisfactory access must be provided including rationalisation of existing access points, and appropriate measures should be taken within the site to ameliorate road traffic noise. Existing trees should be retained and new landscaping provided particularly to the south and north, and suitable measures should be incorporated to protect the amenity and setting of the Listed Building (Moat Hotel) and adjacent residential properties;

(f) Winsor Works, London Road, Addington: proposals should achieve a rationalisation and improvement of access to the A20, a visual enhancement of the site, make appropriate measures to ameliorate road traffic noise, and investigate and provide for treatment of any land contamination;

(g) Salts Yard, Redwell Lane, Ightham: proposals should be of a scale and density compatible with the residential character of the area, should minimise the impact of built development on the woodland setting (Policy P4/8), and investigate and provide for treatment of any land contamination;

(h) Roughway Mill, Plaxtol: proposals should seek to retain any important features of industrial archaeological interest, achieve a reduction in traffic movements, and investigate and provide for treatment of any land contamination;

(i) Tower Garage, Wrotham Hill, Wrotham: proposals should achieve a visual enhancement of the site, a rationalisation of existing uses, include appropriate measures to ameliorate road traffic noise, and investigate and provide for treatment of any land contamination;

(j) Princess Christian’s Hospital, Hildenborough: proposals should retain the parkland character of the site, provide for the restoration and reuse of the Grade II Listed Building (Glen House), and any redevelopment of the agricultural buildings fronting Riding Lane should retain an agricultural character.

6.5.4 Proposals for the redevelopment of the established Green Belt sites listed in Policy P6/18 above, need to ensure that they will achieve an environmental improvement without causing harm to the Green Belt, and in the case of more complex sites ensure that partial redevelopment of the site would not prejudice the overall objective of achieving an enhancement in the environment of the site as a whole. Certain sites in the Green Belt are also firmly allocated for redevelopment under Policy P5/1or already have planning permission. Any further applications for development at these sites will be considered against the terms of Policy P6/18.

6.6.1 Some rural lanes have remained unchanged for many years and are important for their landscape, amenity, nature conservation, historic or archaeological value. Structure Plan Policy ENV13 seeks to protect such rural lanes from changes which would damage their character and, where possible, seeks their enhancement. Kent County Council and the District Councils in Kent have undertaken a detailed study of rural lanes throughout Kent which identifies priority measures for the protection and enhancement of lanes. The Borough Council, in liaison with Kent County Council, will consider appropriate enhancement measures in the light of the findings of the Rural Lanes Study. It would be desirable to extend this study in due course to include other rights of way which are not metalled highways but are open to wheeled traffic. In order to ensure that the character of rural lanes is protected, the following policy will apply:

POLICY P6/19

In the consideration of development proposals which are in the vicinity of, or are served by, rural lanes, the Borough Council will only grant permission where

(1) the development is not materially detrimental to the value of the lane in terms of its landscape, amenity, nature conservation, historic or archaeological importance;

(2) any proposed alterations to a lane are the minimum necessary to serve the proposal in terms of highway safety.

Where alterations to the lane are necessary, preference will be given to the use of natural materials such as grass banks, stone setts and hedging. The use of urbanising features such as raised concrete kerb stones, fencing and walls should be avoided, but where these are essential for structural or safety reasons, only natural, local materials should be used. The design of entrances and gates should be appropriate to the rural location.

6.7 Rural Services

Rural Local Centres and Village Shops

6.7.1 Rural local centres provide an important service to local residents, particularly the less mobile. They also help reduce the need for long journeys to urban shopping centres. The Borough Council will therefore promote the strengthening of the retail and service function of the centres by resisting changes of use which undermine this function and through the retention, and enhancement where possible, of short stay car parking provision. Residential use of the upper floors in these centres can assist in the vitality and security of such locations.

6.7.2 Village shops provide an important service to local people and also assist in reducing the need for trips. Village shops have been closing over recent years in response to changes in shopping habits, and there is little the Borough Council can do positively to arrest this trend. However, increasingly petrol filling stations include a small shop and thus perform a dual function which can provide services for those living in rural areas. The Borough Council will respond positively to proposals for new local shops which are otherwise acceptable in planning terms.

POLICY P6/20

1. Retail uses will be permitted in the Rural Local Centres, as listed below and identified on the Proposals Map. Within these areas, changes of use at ground floor level to a use which does not require a shopping centre location or does not provide an appropriate service for the day-to-day needs of the local community will not be permitted.

Where permission is required, proposals for residential use of upper floors will be permitted where they are compatible with other policies of this Plan. Proposals for Business (B1) and town centre office uses (A2) on upper floors will be permitted except where this would involve the loss of existing residential accommodation.

(a) Borough Green;

(b) East Peckham;

(c) Hadlow;

(d) Hildenborough;

(e) Leybourne Grange;

(f) Peter’s Pit (within the mixed use area to which Policy P2/7(c) applies);

(g) West Malling;

(h) Wrotham.

2. Proposals for small individual shop units at the rural settlements identified in Policies P6/1, P6/2 and P6/3 will be permitted where they serve an essential local need, are otherwise acceptable in policy terms, and have no adverse impact on local amenity.

6.7.3 At the rural local centre of West Malling identified in Policy P6/20, there are two areas adjacent to the retail area which are considered suitable in principle for non-retail uses including business uses, financial and professional uses and restaurants.

POLICY P6/21

At West Malling, within the areas defined on the Proposals Map, change of use to the following uses will be considered acceptable in principle, subject to the terms of Policies P4/1, P4/4 and P4/13 where appropriate:

(a) Malling House/Neville Court: Business use (B1), office uses (A2) and accommodation for medical and similar practices;

(b) East of High Street/North of Swan Street: Business use (B1), food and drink uses (A3), office uses (A2), retail (A1) and accommodation for medical and similar practices.

6.7.4 The provision of local community uses in rural areas, for example doctors’ surgeries, adjacent to the settlement to which they relate, may be permitted where it can be demonstrated that a rural location is justified. The reuse or conversion of existing rural buildings is preferred and development should be as unobtrusive as possible. New buildings in the countryside will only be considered favourably on the basis that no alternative accommodation is available and the facility can be proved to be essential. Such uses are not normally appropriate in the Green Belt and thus any proposals for new development for such facilities within the Green Belt will be considered as departures to the Plan and would need to be justified by very special circumstances and be subject to Policy P2/16.

POLICY P6/22

Proposals for local community facilities outside the built confines of settlements will be permitted where they involve the reuse of existing rural buildings appropriately located to improve the social functioning of the settlement to which they relate and are otherwise acceptable in planning terms. Proposals for new buildings for such community facilities will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that:

(1) no alternative accommodation is available either within the confines of the urban areas or villages, or through the conversion of existing buildings under the terms of Policy P6/14;

(2) the proposal is essential to serve the settlement to which it relates.

Proposals within the Green Belt will be subject to Policy P2/16.

6.8.1 The Borough Council is committed to promoting tourism in the Borough and has joined with Tunbridge Wells and Maidstone Borough Councils and Sevenoaks District Council to promote the 'Heart of Kent' area. There are opportunities to create tourist accommodation through the conversion of large properties to hotels or guest houses, particularly in attractive villages and in locations which are well related to the highway network or served by public transport. Tourist accommodation can also be provided in the countryside through the conversion of existing rural buildings (see Policy P6/14).

6.8.2 The Castle Lake site is a well wooded, restored gravel pit located immediately adjacent to the junction of the A228 with the M20 motorway. It is of local nature conservation interest and contains a very attractive lake. An area immediately adjacent to the A228 to the south west of the lake is considered to be less constrained by nature conservation interests and suitable for a limited development for tourist-related uses such as an hotel, a restaurant, or similar use. Any development of this area will have to be subtly integrated with its high quality setting and must respect the nature conservation interest of the wider site. Subject to these caveats, any such development should provide for the management of the Site of Nature Conservation Interest as an informal nature reserve to include limited public access to supplement the existing public footpath crossing the site.

6.8.3 The Castle Lake site as a whole lies outside the confines of the built-up area, and therefore any limited development which is considered acceptable within the terms of the following policy must be regarded as an exception to the policy restraint on new development. It is only the suitability of a small part of this site to meet the tourism objectives of the Plan, together with the potential for achieving proper management of nature conservation interests of the whole site, that may be sufficient, in this particular case, to override other policy considerations.

POLICY P6/23

Proposals for a small hotel, restaurant or other appropriate small-scale tourist related development will be permitted on land at Castle Lake, Leybourne, as defined on the Proposal Map, subject to any development making provision for the management of the Site of Nature Conservation Interest as an informal nature reserve with limited public access. The development should be satisfactorily accessed and integrated with its landscaped setting, without undue detriment to nature conservation interests.

6.8.4 Mereworth Woods is a substantial area of woodland which is of importance for nature conservation and is crossed by long distance footpaths. A new woodland interpretation centre is proposed adjoining Mereworth Woods. The proposal is primarily an open use which is appropriate within the Green Belt, so long as any built development is ancillary to the open use, minimal in scale and sensitively located so as not to prejudice the openness of the Green Belt. The facility will meet recreation and tourism objectives by providing a car park for walkers, and conservation objectives by helping to support the long-term management of the woodland.

POLICY P6/24

Land is allocated for a woodland interpretation centre at Mereworth Woods, as shown on the Proposals Map, subject to any built development being ancillary to the open use, minimal in scale and sensitively located.

6.8.5 Beltring Hop Farm is a major tourist attraction within the Plan area. The site is, however, sensitively located within the landscape and subject to Green Belt constraints. The Borough Council does not wish to discourage appropriate development of the site as a tourist facility but at the same time is concerned that piecemeal development could result in an adverse change in the character of the area as a whole. A Planning Brief and Master Plan setting out comprehensive proposals for the site will therefore be required in order that the impact of proposals for future expansion and/or diversification can be adequately assessed in relation to the countryside, highway capacity and the Green Belt.

POLICY P6/25

Proposals for further tourist related development at Beltring Hop Farm, as defined on the Proposals Map, will be considered in the light of Policies P6/12 and P6/14. Any proposals for development within or adjacent to the defined area, will need to be considered on a comprehensive basis in the context of an approved Planning Brief and Master Plan for the whole site, including all of the open areas. Proposals should preserve and enhance the Grade II* Listed Buildings and their settings and accord with Policy P4/1. Piecemeal development and any proposals which conflict significantly with the terms of the approved Planning Brief and Master Plan will not be permitted.

6.9.1 The performance of the Plan in meeting its aims for rural development as listed in paragraph 6.1.1 will be judged against the following indicators:

(i) the number and location of new houses permitted at rural settlements or in the rural area;

(ii) the number of rural affordable housing units developed in the Borough through the implementation of Policy P6/7;

(iii) the net change in employment in rural areas;

(iv) the number of intrusive sites redeveloped resulting in an improvement to rural amenity;

(v) activity within the rural tourist sector including new tourist related development, visitor numbers, length of stay and average spending rates;

(vi) the net change in the number of shop units in rural centres;

(vii) the number of new local community facilities provided.