1,300-home mixed-use development at Development Site Land East Of Kiln Barn Road And West Of Hermitage Lane Aylesford

“Outline planning application with all matters reserved (except for access, which is to include the Sustainable Movement Corridor from New Road East Malling to Kiln Barn Road) for development of land to west of Hermitage Lane and East of Kiln Barn Road comprised of: a residential-led development of up to 1,300 dwellings including affordable housing; a new village centre including a primary school; ancillary commercial, community and employment floorspace; strategic open…”

“A central formal open space and other areas of open green spaces and play areas…”

“Part 1 Public 3. The Site: The site is located between Ditton to the north, Maidstone to the east, East Malling to the west and the railway line between Barming and East Malling to the south and has an irregular shape covering just under 80 hectares. The site is indirectly accessible from the strategic road network via the M20 and rail services to London and Ashford are provided by East Malling and Barming train stations, located within close proximity to the site.”

“To the west of the residential development site are the open fields and the East Malling Research Campus. There is established residential development at ‘Orchard Gate’, which borders part of the western area of the proposed residential development.”

“Planning History (relevant): 24/00392/LB Pending consideration 8 May 2024 Listed Building Consent Application: Proposed partial demolition of a section of curtilage listed boundary wall to support the widening of the internal estate road access point with New Road 23/01418/EASP EIA required 22 December 2023 Request for an EIA Scoping Opinion under Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (as Amended) 22/00134/FL Approved 18 May 2022…”

“Part 1 Public 22/00135/LB Approved 18 May 2022 Listed Building Application: Proposed partial demolition of a section of curtilage listed boundary wall in connection with planning application TM/22/00134/FL: Demolition of existing bungalow and ancillary structures, upgrading and widening of existing estate access road along with associated amendments to boundary wall, erection of two new 2 storey dwellings (Use Class C3), car ports, landscaping and associated hardstanding. 5.”

“The Committee considered the addendum report setting out the reasons for refusal identified at the meeting held on 24 June 2026, points of clarification, additional consultation responses, further information submitted by the applicant and a consolidated schedule of proposed Heads of Terms and conditions. Members were advised that the application remained recommended for approval subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement and the conditions set out in the reports.”

“Summary 5.7 Ditton Parish Council (DPC) strongly objects to the planning application, as specified, in the following areas of concern: Loss of Privacy 2. Overshadowing and Overlooking 3. Adequacy of parking 4. Highway safety 5. Traffic Generation 6. Noise Dust and Air Pollution 7. Impact on Conservation Area(s) 8. Facilities 9. Intrusion into the countryside 10. Public Rights of Way (PRoWs) 11. Archaeology 12. Tree Protection Order / Species Protection 13.”

“Part 1 Public disturbance from the construction phase (such as increased noise, dust generation, lighting and increased human activity) could have an adverse impact on these habitats and there could be accidental damage from machinery 5.83 DPC is concerned that this development will result in loss of wildlife habitat over the short to medium term, from which the native fauna will never recover.”

“During detailed consideration of the application, Members revisited the four grounds of refusal identified at the previous meeting and debated the Sustainable Movement Corridor and its impact on the setting of heritage assets, the safeguarding of mineral resources within the site, the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land and the level of…”

“Members also expressed concern that the significant expenditure associated with the proposed Sustainable Movement Corridor had contributed to a reduction in the level of affordable housing provision secured by the development scheme.”

“A motion to grant planning permission in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services, subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement and the recommended Heads of Terms, conditions and informatives set out in the reports, was proposed by Councillor Davis (Vice-Chair, in the Chair) and seconded by Councillor Hudson. Following a vote, the motion was lost with majority of the Committee voted against.”

“Members were advised that, under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2026, the Committee was unable to formally determine the application as the proposals fell within the remit of the Direction and related to residential development with a proposed provision of 150 or more houses, flats or houses and flats, which had not been determined before 11 May 2026.”

“(1) the Committee be MINDED TO REFUSE the application for planning permission on grounds 1 and 2 identified in the addendum report, set out as follows, subject to reference being made to Hythe Formation Ragstone within reason 2, with finalisation of detailed wording being delegated to the Director of Planning, Housing and Regulatory Services:”

“The Sustainable Movement Corridor, due to the extent and proximity to the grade I listed St James the Great church, will cause less than substantial harm, at the lower end of the scale, to the heritage asset, which will significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the Sustainable Movement Corridor element of the proposed development. This is contrary to paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024); and…”