Contact your Parish Council
![](https://meetings.maidstone.gov.uk/SiteSpecific/mbc_files/mobbutton.jpg)
Issue - meetings
MA 13 0297 BALTIC WHARF ST PETERS STREET MAIDSTONE KENT ME16 0ST
Meeting: 09/01/2014 - Planning Committee (Item 242)
242 MA 13 0297 - BALTIC WHARF, ST PETERS STREET, MAIDSTONE, KENT PDF 113 KB
Additional documents:
- Report for MA 13 0297, item 242
PDF 223 KB View as HTML (242/2) 200 KB
- 13_0297_0298_photos, item 242
PDF 1 MB
Minutes:
The Committee considered the report of the Head of Planning and Development regarding this application and application MA/13/0298.
Mr Jeffery, petitioner and objector, Mr Rees, for the Applicant, Councillors Pickett and Ross (Visiting Members) addressed the meeting.
RESOLVED: That the Planning Inspectorate be advised that, had there not been an appeal for non-determination, the Committee would have refused planning permission for the reasons set out below:-
1.
The proposed development does not comply with the
Council’s strategy for future retail development in Maidstone
as set out within the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan (2000), or
within the emerging Maidstone Local Plan (which are consistent with
the National Planning Policy Framework), which designate other
sites for new retail development and do not designate this site for
such a use.
2.
The proposed development does not comply with the
sequential approach set out in paragraph 24 of the National
Planning Policy Framework, and within Policy R2 of the Maidstone
Borough Wide Local Plan (2000) as it is out-of-centre in retail
terms; and there are more sequentially preferable sites available
which could accommodate the proposed development with due
flexibility on the part of the developer.
3.
The proposed development would have a significant
adverse impact on planned investment in Maidstone town centre,
which would put at risk the Council's strategy to secure new retail
development on the Maidstone East site and elsewhere within the
town centre set out in the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan
(2000), and in the emerging Maidstone Local Plan, and is therefore
contrary to paragraph 26 of the National Planning Policy
Framework.
4. The proposed development, due in particular to the loss of the stairwell and north wing, would result in substantial harm to the Grade II Listed Buidling, which is not considered to be outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. The proposal therefore conflicts with the advice gien in the National Planning Policy Framework, paragraphs 131, 132 and 133.
5. The proposed development would result in the loss of a tree that is protected by a Preservation Order (2 of 2013). The loss of this tree would have a significantly detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the locality, and would therefore fail to comply with paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Voting: 11 – For 0 – Against 1 – Abstention