Issue - meetings

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

Mr Moss addressed the Committee on behalf of objectors. Councillor Harvey (Visiting Member) spoke in objection to the application, and Councillor English read a statement on behalf of Councillor Pickett also in objection to the application. Mr Ernest spoke on behalf of the applicant.

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 proposed development by reason of its design, bulk and massing fails to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness as set out in paragraph 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and that the site is a high profile location on the approach to Maidstone Town Centre and as a result fails to achieve good design contrary to paragraph 60 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and policy ENV21 of the Local Plan 2000.

The proposal, by reason of its siting, height, depth, scale and design, would represent a visually intrusive, overbearing and unneighbourly form of development and would result in an unreasonable loss of outlook and privacy to adjoining residential properties, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

In the absence of an appropriate legal mechanism to secure 40% affordable housing and necessary contributions towards primary education, local libraries, parks and open space and health care within the local area, the impact of the development would be detrimental to existing social infrastructure and therefore contrary to policy CF1 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan (2000), Affordable Housing DPD (2006), Open Space DPD (2006) and central government planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

RESOLVED:

1.  That permission be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed development by reason of its design, bulk and massing fails to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness as set out in paragraph 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012  and that the site is a high profile location on the approach to Maidstone Town Centre and as a result fails to achieve good design contrary to paragraph 60 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and policy ENV21 of the Local Plan 2000.

The proposal, by reason of its siting, height, depth, scale and design, would represent a visually intrusive, overbearing and unneighbourly form of development and would result in an unreasonable loss of outlook and privacy to adjoining residential properties, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

In the absence of an appropriate legal mechanism to secure 40% affordable housing and necessary contributions towards primary education, local libraries, parks and open space and health care within the local area, the impact of the development would be detrimental to existing social infrastructure and therefore contrary to policy CF1 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan (2000), Affordable Housing DPD (2006), Open Space DPD (2006) and central government planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

2.  That the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 292