150 homes at Land West Of Norwood Lane, Meopham, Gravesend

What officers advised

Officers recommended permission because access could be safe, the location was considered sustainable, and the benefits were not significantly outweighed by harms.

“The site is considered to be in a sustainable location, subject to mitigation being secured and as set out within the report, the principle of residential use is considered to be acceptable. This, together with the site meeting the Grey Belt definition and requirements under the NPPF (2024), carries significant weight. Whilst there is a loss of Grade 2 agricultural land, this is not considered to outweigh the positive benefits of the scheme.”

“The proposal is therefore considered to be consistent with overarching planning policy objectives to achieve a sustainable development in the Borough, and meets the requirements of the NPPF 2024, where the adverse impacts of the proposal do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF 2024 when taken as a whole.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two speakers spoke in favour, while three speakers spoke against the application.

What members debated

Members questioned access, public transport, traffic evidence and walking routes before raising concerns about sustainability, Green Belt, agricultural land and infrastructure.

“As part of the Detail Access Plan the foot way along the northern side of Green Lane would be extended up to and along both sides of the site access, along with a new formal crossing to the footway on the southern side of the site. In order to preserve trees, there would be no formal footway towards Norwood Lane, but it was likely a series of internal pathways would be made, however this was a reserved detail.”

“Following further in-depth discussion, Members had a number of concerns which included the sustainability of the site in terms of access to local amenities and public transport, the potential impact to the Green Belt, loss of agricultural land and lack of infrastructure.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The committee resolved to refuse planning permission.

“Planning Committee 13.05.2026 4 RESOLVED that the planning application be REFUSED permission for the following reasons:”

Minutes

Why permission was refused

The committee found harm to the Green Belt, poor access to services and transport, and insufficient physical and social infrastructure.

“The proposed development fails to safeguard the countryside from encroachment, thereby by undermining the remaining Green Belt, and is in an unsustainable location with poor access to public transport and local facilities and services. It is therefore considered contrary to Policy CS01 Sustainable Development, Policy CS02 Scale and Distribution of Development of the Local Plan Core Strategy (2014), and the requirements of Para.”

“The proposed development, by virtue of the increase in the number of dwellings, would place additional demand on existing physical and social infrastructure that is insufficient to accommodate the scale of development proposed. The proposal would therefore give rise to an unacceptable burden on local infrastructure, to the detriment of both existing and future residents.”

Minutes