Issue - meetings

All Members stated that they had been lobbied.

The Committee considered the report and the urgent update report of the Head of Planning and Development.

Ms Burn, for objectors, Councillor Manser of Barming Parish Council (against), Mr Hawkins, for the applicant, and Councillor Mrs Gooch (Visiting Member) (against) addressed the meeting.

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee agreed to refuse permission.  In making this decision, Members felt that:

·  The form of development proposed would introduce an urbanising and jarring character to North Street, a rural lane which formed a clear boundary between the existing settlement and open countryside to the west, contrary to policies ENV6 and ENV28 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000 and the National Planning Policy Framework specifically paragraphs 56, 57, 58, 61 and 64.

·  The proposed development was outside of the village envelope and within open countryside contrary to policy ENV28 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.

·  The proposed translocation receptor site was inappropriately sited and of a scale which would not replace the habitat lost contrary to the Natural England standing advice and the National Planning Policy Framework.

·  The northern part of the development would result in significant harm to the setting of a Grade II listed building known as Broumfield located adjacent to the site and any benefits arising from the development would not outweigh the harm to this heritage asset.  To permit the proposal would therefore be contrary to Central Government policy contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.  The form of development proposed will introduce an urbanising and jarring character to North Street, a rural lane which forms a clear boundary between the existing settlement and open countryside to the west; contrary to policies ENV6 and ENV28 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000 and the National Planning Policy Framework specifically paragraphs 56, 57, 58, 61 and 64.

2.  The proposed development lies outside of the village envelope and within open countryside contrary to policy ENV28 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.

3.  The proposed translocation receptor site is inappropriately sited and of a scale which will not replace the habitat lost contrary to the Natural England standing advice and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.  The northern part of the development would result in significant harm to the setting of a Grade II listed building known as Broumfield located adjacent to the site and any benefits arising from the development are not considered to outweigh the harm to this heritage asset.  To permit the proposal would therefore be contrary to Central Government policy contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Voting:  13 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions