Ruling backs future of rural pubs
THE battle to ensure the survival of village pubs has been boosted by an appeal deci- sion inMaidstone Council’s favour. In November last year, the council refused
an application to convert The Harrow Inn in The Street, Ulcombe (pictured), into per- manent residential accommodation because it was feared the loss of the last remaining pub in the centre of the village would have had a negative impact on the “vitality and viability of the village”. This was despite the pub being closed
since December 2005. Owners Philippe and Karen Debax-Latour claimed The Harrow was unable to compete with pubs in neigh- bouring villages and hamlets and there was little interest in purchasing the property from them as a going concern. The council’s decision has now been sup- ported at appeal, with planning inspector Clive Hughes reporting: “I have given con- siderable weight to the fact that the appel-
Late night
shopping plans FOLLOWING lastweek’s switch on of the Maidstone festive lights, traders have announced their late-night opening for Christmas shoppers. Most of the town centre shops
will remain open until8pmeach Thursday from now until Mon- day December 17, when they will remain open every week night until 8pm, and from 9am to 5.30pm on Saturday and Sun- day, December 22 and 23, as well as on Monday, Christmas Eve. All shops will be closed on Christmas Day, but will be open again from 9am to 5.30pm on Boxing Day, with another late night for shoppers until 8pm on Thursday, December 27. Normal opening hours will
then apply, with the exception of Tuesday January 1st, New Year’s Day, when the Sunday hours of 10.30am to 4.30pm will apply to those shops which choose to open. For further information con-
tact Town Centre Management on 01622 678777.
THE erection of a gate and fenc- ing on rural land south west of Caring Road, Leeds, has sparked concerns that it will give a green light to housing developers. Applicant Andy Desmond, a retired police officer, claimed the structure was necessary to allow sheep to safely graze on one of 10 plots on the land and was given planning permission by Maidstone Council. He said most of the rest of the land was inhabited by horses. The proposal would usually
get the go-ahead automatically under permitted development rights, but nine years ago Maid- stone Council successfully gained an article 4 direction that required planning consent for any enclosures due to con- cerns arising from the sale and
32 East
lants bought the premises as a going con- cern and ran it for almost five years. How- ever, the appellants knew that it had been unprofitable for at least three years when they bought it. “Anecdotal evidence at the hearing,
whichwas not challenged, related to a num- ber of aspects of the business which, it was alleged, deterred potential customers. These included important matters such as
hygiene and the quality of the menus and alcohol. “I am also concerned about the way in which the business has been marketed. While it is stated by the appellants that it has been on the books of Christie & Co as being available for sale since 2006 andwith another company (Simon Miller & Co) since 2009, no evidence concerning the scale or form of any marketing exercisewas put forward. “No details of any sale particulars, details
of price, or level of responsewere available. Local residents commented on the lack of any sale boards at the premises and to the fact that its shabby appearance may deter potential buyers. Due to the lack of evi- dence, the claim of commercial viability cannot reasonably be upheld.” Mr Hughes’ conclusion was the same as
the council’s: planning permission should be refused due to the harm it would cause to Ulcombe’s viability.
Solar park approved despite concerns
THE borough is to have its first solar park, after coun- cillors voted unanimously in favour of a schemeto es- tablish24,000 panels in EastLenhamFarm, Lenham. The planning committee was impressed with Ger-
man company Kronos Solar’s proposal to place the 1m-long south-facing solar panels in a series of 2- 2.4m-high rowformations within 14 hectares of land north of Lenham Heath Road and the CTRL train line, just east of Boughton Road fringing Sandway. Consentwas granted for a 25-year period – the ex- pected lifespan of the panels, which will be designed to meet the electricity needs for 5,000 people. Concerns about the loss of arable farmland were
eased by the fact that the land between the panels will be used for grazing. CommitteememberCllr CliveEnglish said: “Central
government policy isextremely supportiveof this type of
proposal.The loss of low-grade agricultural land will be mitigated to improve the biodiversity of the site. “This is a commendable proposal and the country
will need toseemoreof
these.Someof the objections remindmeof objections topylonswhen theywere put in in the 1950s and 1960s.” Themaindissentwas onvisualgrounds. Localward member Cllr Tom Sams said: “I am in favour of solar energy and actually have panels onmy roof – but this measures just five feet by four feet. “The Kent Downs AONB unit raised concerns about
the industrialisation of a rural site, English Heritage said there may be an effect on the Grade I listed Chilston Park nearby. “The development would cause visual harm to the
possible sub-division of parts of the land into individual plots. In June 2006 a group of gyp-
sies squatted on the land, which measures 2.6 hectares, but were evicted by Maidstone Council. Objector Mr Leonard told the planning committee: “This is the latest twist in the scandal of subdivision of agricultural land to plots with a view to the sale for future housing. “Article 4 directions are the
best weapon a local authority has to prevent the negative ef- fect of subdivision of land. “If you grant this application
you will be faced with a string of applications, each innocuous on their own, that will result in a patchwork of fenced-off plots.” Otham Parish Council echoed
landscape. JustbecausewehavemotorwayandCTRL does not mean we should increase the visual impact on the rest of the area. Putting up a few more trees does not make a difference.” Theapplicant promised additional landscapingof6-
8m height on the site’s northern boundary. Cllr Tony Harwood,who proposed the granting of planning per- mission, sounded a note of caution. “There is research that shows polarised light is in-
trusive in the landscape and harmful to wildlife. This couldbethe first ofmany suchapplicationsandwe, as acouncil, shouldcomeupwithapolicy tomitigate the harm of solar parks in the future.We are on a journey and this is the first learning stage.” All11members of the committee voted in favour of
the scheme. Fencing plan ‘heralds future development’ Amy competes
this stance, along with members of the committee that included localward Cllr Gordon Newton. However, committee member
Cllr Clive English said: “It is not relevant who did what towhom in terms of property ownership or to speculate about motives of applicants or land owners or of what might happen. “Let’s stick to what the law allows us to do. “Article 4 does not mean you cannot apply for planning per- mission. All it does is require you do so. “It is difficult to see how this planning authority could argue how a post and nail fence of this nature could cause any harm. ” Permission was granted by
eight votes for, with three against.
for tasty title INVICTA Grammar School stu- dent AmyMonkwillfindout this week if her culinary skills have brought her closer to being Kent’s best budding chef. Amy is one of eight finalists
due to take part in the Kent Young Chef 2012 Live Cook Off at K College, Tonbridge, when her main course recipe of spinach, goat’s cheese and mushroom ravioli with cobnut pesto, cream and basil sauce with rosemary and olive beer bread, will be up against con- tenders from across the county. There were 102 entries from
23 schools, as young people be- tween 11 and 16 set out to de- vise an original main course recipe featuring Kentish pro- duce.
Support YOUR local paper — and we can support YOU - advertise on 01622 630330
How the solar park in Lenham could look
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56