![](https://meetings.maidstone.gov.uk/SiteSpecific/mbc_files/mobbutton.jpg)
Issue - meetings
19/506100/OUT - Land West Of Church Road, Otham, Kent, ME15 8SB
Meeting: 28/05/2020 - Planning Committee (Item 268)
Additional documents:
- 19/501600/OUT - Committee Report, item 268
PDF 371 KB
- 19/501600/OUT - Appendix A, item 268
PDF 391 KB
- 19/501600/OUT - Appendix B, item 268
PDF 153 KB
- 19.501600 Urgent Update 28.05.20, item 268
PDF 84 KB
Minutes:
The Committee considered the report and the urgent update report of the Head of Planning and Development.
In presenting the application, the Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that:
· The previous day he had been sent details of an on-line petition objecting to development at Church Road, Otham. The petition showed 1,386 supporters and this may have increased since then.
· In terms of the request by the Chapman Avenue Area Residents’ Association and Otham Parish Council for the application to be called in by the Secretary of State, he had received a communication from the Government’s Planning Case Work Unit advising that they had received the request and would consider their position should the Council agree to grant permission.
· Further representations had been received but they did not raise any new material issues in relation to the application.
The Chairman read out statements which had been submitted by Mr Everett of the Downswood Community Association (an objector), Councillor Gray of Otham Parish Council, Councillor Weeks of Downswood Parish Council and Mr Goodban (agent for the applicant).
Councillors Newton, Harper, McKay and Springett (Visiting Members) addressed the meeting.
Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, it was proposed and seconded that permission be refused for the following reasons:
(a) The proposal will result in severe traffic congestion on local road networks (Deringwood Drive, Spot Lane, Mallards Way and Madginford Road) and the increase in traffic will adversely affect residents to the point that air pollution is beyond what is reasonable for the Council to accept contrary to Policies H1(8) criteria 9, DM1 and DM6 of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan 2017;
(b) The proposal will result in worsening safety issues on Church Road to the south of the site which has not been addressed and due to the constraints of the road likely will never be able to be addressed contrary to policy DM1 of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan 2017; and
(c) The proposal will adversely affect the settings of the Grade I listed Church and other listed buildings contrary to Policies SP18 and DM4 of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan 2017 where the development will not be protecting or enhancing the characteristics, distinctiveness, diversity and quality of the heritage assets.
Prior to the vote being taken, the Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that a refusal on the first ground would be unreasonable. It referred to air pollution and evidence had been submitted that there would be a negligible impact on air quality and this was agreed by Maidstone Borough Council Environmental Health. A refusal on the grounds of the safety issues on Church Road would be unreasonable for the reasons set out in the report and the limited one additional movement per minute from the development over the peak hour. The proposed reason for refusal on heritage grounds would also be unreasonable for the reasons set out in the report and this was an outline application. The site had been assessed ... view the full minutes text for item 268