435-home housing scheme at Bunyards Farm, London Road, Maidstone

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for up to 435 homes, including 40% affordable housing, with access, roads, open space and associated works.

“Proposal: Outline planning application for the development of up to 435 dwellings, including 40% affordable homes, with associated landscaping, parking, open space, play areas, etc. Realignment of Beaver Road and the construction of a new vehicular access off of Beaver Road and construction of a new vehicular access onto Godwin Road, and all other associated development works (Access only detailed matter with all other matters reserved).”

“Description: This is a major planning application, made in outline form, for the erection of up to 435 dwellings including 40% affordable homes, with associated landscaping, parking, open space and play areas, on the 15.32 hectares of land at Bunyards, Beaver Road. All other matters are reserved for future consideration except for the access, for which full details are provided with the submitted application.”

Officer report

Planning history

Earlier applications included refusals for residential development, permissions for a golf course and an approved outline application for 43 homes.

“TM/58/10419/OLD Refuse 8 October 1958 Outline application for residential development…”

“TM/80/10011/OUT Refuse 29 September 1980 Outline application for residential development of 74 acres of land…”

Officer report

What consultees and residents said

The parish council, Maidstone Council, residents and others raised concerns about development, traffic, landscape, infrastructure, ecology and the strategic gap.

“Adverse impact upon the landscape – as for the adjacent land, built development on this currently undeveloped, former agricultural land would cause significant local harm. As a result, development at this quantum and in this location would be contrary to policy SQ1 of the Managing Development and the Environment DPD (2010) and para. 130 of the NPPF (2021).”

“The Parish Council would appreciate being advised when that point is reached, failing which it would expect further representations submitted in response to the officer’s report to be presented to the Committee, as is the case elsewhere within the County.”

Officer report

Objections received

Seventy-four objections cited overdevelopment, urban sprawl, congestion, inadequate infrastructure, loss of open space, ecological harm and unsafe access.

“Neighbour Consultee Comments: A total of 74 objections have been received, on the following summarised grounds: • Over development • Forms mass urban sprawl • Development should not be built here hence the village green application • Over 2000 new homes near to Allington which has ruined the area • Housing proposed is too dense • Builds into the Medway strategic gap • Will create an unbroken line of development from Aylesford to Maidstone • Allington is ruined by new…”

“There is no park and ride anymore • Conflict with a previous approval over accesses (19/00376/OAEA) • Another sites emergency access is this site’s permanent access • Not enough parking proposed for 1700 cars • The Kent Messenger Railway Bridge should be replaced as part of the development • Poor pedestrian access under the bridge which will be exacerbated by the new homes • Footpaths in the area are unlit which is unsafe for existing and new residents • Not sufficient…”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two ward councillors, the applicant’s agent and a member of the public speaking for New Allington Action Group addressed the committee.

Members’ concerns and balance

Members discussed green space, infrastructure, congestion, environmental impacts and the Castor Park access, while recognising housing delivery and proposed contributions.

“Due regard was given to the determining issues detailed in both the main and the supplementary reports of the Director of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services, as well as the points raised by the speakers. Members expressed concerns regarding the loss of green space, infrastructure pressures, traffic congestion, environmental impacts, and the suitability of the proposed secondary access via Castor Park given its unadopted road status by the Kent County Council.”

“However, it was acknowledged that the proposed development supported the overarching aims of national and local planning policy in relation to housing delivery by providing up to 435 dwellings and making a strong contribution towards the existing local shortfall, including policy compliant affordable housing.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to approve the application with an emergency-only condition for the Castor Park access passed with six votes in favour and seven abstentions.

“It was proposed by Councillor D Thornewell (Chair), seconded by Councillor T Bishop, that the planning application be approved subject to an additional condition to restrict the use of the secondary access off Castor Park as an emergency access only, with details regarding design, measures to prevent unauthorised access, monitoring and future enforcement to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as the Local Planning Authority prior to development above slab…”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to the reports’ conditions, a Section 106 agreement and a condition restricting the secondary access to emergencies.

“RESOLVED: That planning permission be GRANTED in accordance with the submitted details, conditions, reasons and informatives set out in both the main and the supplementary reports of the Director of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services, subject to:”

“(2) addition of a condition to restrict the use of the secondary access off Castor Park as an emergency access only, with the final wording of the condition being delegated to the Director of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Area 3 Planning Committee, to agree.”

Minutes