Parcel collection locker at St Georges Hall, Sissinghurst, Cranbrook

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for a free-standing parcel locker with a canopy and LED lighting beside the community hall.

“SITE AND PROPOSAL 1.01 The subject relates to St Georges Hall, a community hall located within the St Georges Meadow development, situated south of The Street in Sissinghurst.”

“This application seeks retrospective planning permission for the installation of a free-standing external parcel collection locker. The locker is situated on the eastern elevation of the community hall towards the entrance of the residential development, consisting of a canopy that extends forward from the locker with LED lighting strips along the frontage.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions covered three dwellings and the redevelopment of the community hall with facilities, parking, homes and landscaping.

“Construction of three dwellings with rear access and additional parking areas…”

“Demolition of the existing St George's Institute building and erection of a new building providing community facilities, community parking spaces, improved access arrangements, 19 dwellings and associated landscaping and infrastructure Granted 12/01/23 23/01170/NMAMD”

Officer report

The officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended refusal because overnight lighting would harm the rural landscape, dark skies and wildlife, with no alternative lighting scheme proposed.

“The proposed development, by virtue of the provision of external artificial lighting that is operational throughout the night, would result in a detrimental impact on the rural landscape character of the application site, the dark skies environment and local wildlife. Alternative lighting schemes or controls i.e. motion sensor lighting to mitigate this identified harm has not been sought.”

“The parcel collection locker, by reason of the provision of external artificial lighting throughout the night, would cause harm to the rural landscape, dark skies environment and local wildlife. No alternative external lighting schemes have been sought to minimise the harm caused.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council supported approval with lighting, operating-hours and colour conditions; Environmental Health sought timed lighting, while highways and conservation officers raised no objections.

“Cranbrook & Sissinghurst Parish Council – received 05/12/2025: Recommend approval subject to conditions to switch off external lighting outside of operating hours and operating hours of the locker is strictly enforced between 7am and 11pm. Request for the colour of the locker to be changed to a less obtrusive shade.”

“MidKent Environmental Health – received 28/11/2025: There is potential for late night and early morning disturbances and glare should not be directed towards neighbouring premises. No objections are raised subject to a condition to require the external lighting to be fitted with a timer control system to ensure lighting is switched off between the hours of 2300 and 0600.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Three registered speakers included two local residents and the ward member.

Members’ debate

Members considered lighting intrusive and the location unsuitable, discussed noise muffling and other concerns, and noted that size and colour were not otherwise obtrusive.

“- As the application was recommended for refusal based on lighting implications only, there was concern that this could be challenged and corrected at an appeal, meaning other concerns raised by residents regarding noise and traffic would remain. - Whether the locker was wanted as a community use was not a planning consideration and was a commercial decision to be made by the relevant company.”

“- Some Members also felt that the application was not compliant with Policy EN1 of the Tunbridge Wells Local Plan, which stated proposals should retain and enhance buildings that contribute positively to locality and the street scene. - Members were reminded that refusal based on lighting implication had been deemed the most appropriate reason as the size, colour and nature of the locker was not deemed otherwise obtrusive.”

Minutes

The votes

Members carried an amendment adding Policy EN1 reasoning by six votes to three, then unanimously voted to refuse in line with the officer recommendation.

“Decision/voting – An amendment to the officer’s recommendation as set out in the report was proposed by Councillor Osborne, seconded by Councillor Pitts to include:”

“On the basis that members were satisfied that all relevant planning considerations had been covered within the report, a motion was proposed by Councillor Le Page, seconded by Councillor Pound and a vote was taken to refuse the application in line with the officer recommendation. The vote was unanimous in favour.”

Minutes

The final decision

The application was refused with additional reasoning that it did not comply with Policy EN1 of the Tunbridge Wells Local Plan.

“RESOLVED – That application PLA251/25 be refused with additional…”

Minutes