Light industrial units at White Heath, Ashford Road, Hollingbourne
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Mid Kent Planning Committee on 23 Apr 2026.
What was proposed
An outline scheme proposed 3,045 square metres of light industrial floorspace, with associated landscaping and infrastructure, while access was submitted for approval.
“The proposal is an outline application with all matters reserved except for access. It is therefore the case that the outstanding reserved matters are appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale.”
“The proposal seeks to create 3,045 square metres (sqm) of light industrial commercial floorspace (Class E(g)(iii)) and associated landscaping and infrastructure. The drawings identify some key parameters for the buildings on site with an eaves height of 6.4 metres (m) and ridge height of 7.4m.”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The cleared site covered about 1.03 hectares, with mature trees, an existing access, countryside constraints and an employment allocation on three sides.
“At the time of the site visit it was apparent that the site has been cleared, with limited evidence of the former buildings remaining except for a central tarmac access track. There are a number of prominent mature trees within the site along the north-west and north-eastern boundary, as well a single mature tree in the south of the site. To the front of the site is the A20, which includes pavement provision.”
“As shown in the image below adjacent to the site is an Employment Allocation (shaded blue) identified within the Local Plan Review 2024 (reference EMP1). This allocation wraps around the site on three sides.”
Officer report
Earlier applications and enforcement
Earlier proposals included a refused care home and dismissed appeals for major developments, while a demolition enforcement enquiry was closed without finding a breach.
“19/502470/OUT - Outline application for redevelopment of land to the west of White Heath, including demolition of existing buildings and erection of new 3 storey building to form a care home (Use Class C2) for residents requiring nursing, dementia and residential care, with new access, car parking, landscaped gardens and a separate refuse/recycling facility (Access, Appearance, Layout and Scale being sought).”
“23/500731/OPDEV - Enforcement enquiry due to demolition works - Closed 22.12.2023 as it was found that no breach of planning control had occurred.”
Officer report
Why officers supported it
Officers considered the countryside location a departure, but supported the scheme because it was previously developed land beside a business park and could be suitably screened.
“When considering the principle of development, the site is at a transitional point between a large business park and the countryside which is strongly underpinned by agricultural uses. But it is in the countryside and the proposed use is not given policy support within the LPR in this countryside location and as such this application is considered to be a Departure from the development plan.”
“Whilst the proposal is clearly at odds with the Spatial Strategy, the interconnection with the business park, that wraps around the site on three sides is relevant. It is recognised that the proposal is for a similar use to the adjacent site. A departure from the development plan is therefore supported in this unique scenario. However, this is subject to the acceptability of the proposal in the round, as assessed later in this appraisal.”
Officer report
What consultees said
Key consultees raised no objection, subject to conditions covering highways, environmental protection, ecology, archaeology, drainage and other detailed matters.
“KCC Highways and Transportation 1.17 No objection subject to conditions for: (1) construction management plan; (2) prevention of surface water onto the highway; (3) provision and permanent retention of parking; (4) provision and permanent retention of the vehicle loading/unloading and turning facilities; (5) bound surface for access; (6) provision and retention cycle parking facilities; (7) completion and maintenance of the access shown on the plans; and, (8) provision and…”
“MBC Environmental Protection Team 1.20 No objection subject to conditions for: (1) construction method statement; (2) industrial/commercial noise rating level; (3) dust, odour and vapour emissions; (4) 16”
Officer report
Residents and parish council
No residents supported or opposed the application, and the parish council did not wish to comment.
“No representations received either objecting to or supporting the application.”
“Hollingbourne Parish Council 1.16 Confirmed that it does not wish to comment to this planning proposal.”
Officer report
The recommended terms
The recommendation was to grant permission subject to a legal agreement securing biodiversity net gain and local labour, together with planning conditions.
“GRANT planning permission subject to the following conditions and the prior completion of a legal agreement or planning obligation to secure the heads of terms set out below with delegated authority to the Head of Development Management to be able to settle or amend any necessary Heads of Terms, planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and/or as resolved by the Planning Committee:”
“HEADS OF TERMS • Biodiversity Net Gain: To secure the on-site & off-site biodiversity net gain of at least a minimum 10% net gain in habitat units for at least 30 years including £10,000 (to cover the costs of the LPA reviewing monitoring reports). • Local Labour: To require the applicant to provide opportunities for the employment of local residents in the construction of the development (or secured via alternative means).”
Officer report
The committee vote
The committee granted permission subject to conditions and a legal agreement, with delegated powers for necessary changes; the vote was unanimous.
“That permission be granted subject to conditions and the prior completion of a legal agreement or planning obligation to secure the heads of terms set out in the report and urgent update report.”
“That the Head of Planning and Economic Development be given delegated powers to be able to settle or amend any necessary planning conditions and/or informatives in line with the matters set out in the recommendation and as resolved by the Planning Committee.”
Minutes
Sources
- Mid Kent Planning Committee minutes, 23 April 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Mid Kent's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Mid Kent Planning Committee
- Council
- Mid Kent
- Date
- Thursday 23 April 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Mid Kent committee decisions →
This committee's year
68 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 6 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.