The Committee considered the report, and urgent updates, of the Head of Planning and Development.
Mr Rogers (objector), Councillor Kenward (of Ulcombe Parish Council), Councillor Hoy (of Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council) and Mr Charlton (applicant) addressed the Committee on this item.
1. That, subject to the
conditions and informatives outlined in the report and amended in the urgent updates
of the Head of Planning and Development, planning permission is granted.
2. That condition is 5 amended to read (addition in bold):
The development hereby approved shall not commence until a landscape scheme designed in accordance with the principles of the Maidstone Landscape Character Assessment Supplement 2012 has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of Planning and Development, in consultation with the Political Group Spokespersons of the Planning Committee. The scheme shall show all existing trees, hedges and blocks of landscaping on, and immediately adjacent to, the site and indicate whether they are to be retained or removed and include a planting specification, a programme of implementation and maintenance and a 5 year management plan. The landscape scheme shall reflect the locations of the lines of hedges shown on the Planting Proposals Plan (LVA, Figure 3) but specify the removal of existing conifer species and their replacement with appropriate native hedgerows. The hedgerow species mix shall include a proportion of evergreen shrubs (Holly or Yew) and species which retain their leaves for a large proportion of the year (Hornbeam or Beech) to maximise the screening effect without compromising existing landscape character. The landscaping shall also include a physical barrier to provide a 15m buffer to the Ancient Woodland to the north of the site.
3. That an additional condition is added:
The development hereby permitted shall not take place until a transport plan has been submitted and approved in writing by the Head of Planning and Development, in consultation with the Political Group Spokespersons of the Planning Committee.
Voting: For - 5 Against - 3 Abstentions – 1