Tesco superstore scheme refused Nature reserve


MAIDSTONE Council has rejected Tesco’s super- market plan for Staplehurst, giving rivals Sains- bury’s a free hand to build a store in the village. The borough’s planning committee refused the


Tesco scheme for Station Approach by a single vote after Conservative councillors Stephen Paine and Rodd Nelson-Gracie went against fellow party members and abstained from the vote, meaning the six Lib Dems who opposed the scheme outnumbered the five Tories in favour. Campaigners sitting in the front row of the au- dience, having spoken passionately against the scheme, broke into a round of applause when the voting had been completed. They thanked Coun- cillors Nelson-Gracie and Paine who, as the cabi- net member for planning, is one of the most senior members on the council, but had voted dif- ferently to council leader Chris Garland, a substi- tute member of the committee who was heavily in favour of the proposal. The plan for the supermarket, which would


have had a total sales area of 2,817sqm and have been built on the site of the commuter car park, was deferred in January after committee members raised concerns about the associated 660-space car park proposed in open countryside off George Street, north of the railway station. At the same hearing, Sainsbury’s was granted planning permission for a 2,975sqm supermarket, served by 171 car parking spaces. The supermar- ket is to be built on the current site of diamond manufacturer DK Holding, who was previously given consent to move into larger, more modern premises elsewhere on the site. Cllr Dennis Collins (Con)was strongly in favour


of the Tesco application. He felt that any harm caused to the countryside by the car park would be outweighed by the economic benefits of the su- permarket. He said: “There are no adverse effects on the countryside caused by the car park. I go past that piece of land three times a week and it is an un- manageable mess at the moment. I have never known it to be managed properly, or any of the hedgerows cut. This is out of keeping with the open countryside.” Cllr Fran Wilson (Lib Dem) responded to this


with incredulity: “Nature is derelict, it is un- kempt and it is wild by definition.”


No timetable for building of


Sainsbury’s WORK on the new Sains- bury’s supermarket is still a long way away from com- mencing. The supermarket will be


built on the site of DK Hold- ings, but this can only begin when the company has been relocated elsewhere in Sta- tion Approach. Aplanning application has


been submitted, requesting the discharge of conditions relating to the DK Holdings scheme. Should Maidstone Council accept this, then work can commence straight away on the diamondmanu- facturer’s premises. “That will be the first


phase of the development, and the building of the su- permarket will then follow. We have no timetable on this,” a spokesman said.


16 South


The land Cllr Dennis Collins claims is an ‘unmanageable mess’


She added that one of Tesco’s mitigation pro- posals – a new 1.4 hectare managed nature re- serve to the east of the proposed car park and bounded by George Street, High Street and the railway line – would be bad for wildlife. “Nature needs to be interlinked so the animals


and insects can move to other areas, but this area is going to be sandwiched by hardstanding on each side. In effect it will die as a nature area, as a lot of the creatures will not be able to move in between places and over time will die.” The scheme was contrary to council policy ENV28, which states that permission will not be granted for planning applications that harm the character and appearance of the countryside. Cllr Tony Harwood (Lib Dem) said: “There is a matter of principle at stake here. At the moment there are many wards in Maidstone that are threatened with development. If somebody can come along and get permission to build on a greenfield site, I am concerned at the message it sends to other developers. It is a very dangerous time to send out this message.” However, Cllr Collins tabled a motion to get the proposal accepted, on the basis that harm would be outweighed not only by the economic benefits but by the introduction of a new transport inter- change, increased sustainability by the reduction in vehicle journeys Staplehurst residents would otherwise make to supermarkets elsewhere, and the introduction of the nature reserve. Cllr Nelson-Gracie, who earlier in the meeting


made reference to the sustainability benefits, de- cided not to back the proposal, alongside Cllr Paine, and the scheme was blocked.


Committee chairman tells of ‘hate email’


PLANNING committee chair- man Richard Lusty (below) said he had re- ceived “mes- sages bordering on hate” in his email inbox after


he


backed the Tesco scheme in January. In the ear-


lier hearing Cllr Lusty, a ward councillor for Staplehurst, loudly proclaimed the virtues of the proposed nature reserve – claiming it was the “jewel in the crown” of the proposal. He said: “I had messages say-


ing I shouldn’t have been chair- man of this committee for the hearing and I shouldn’t have spoken first, but these would have both been against our con- stitution.” He added after themeeting: “I


was really disappointed with the result. It was silly to pre- serve scrubland in favour of 150 people’s jobs. “Staplehurst had the opportu-


nity to have a supermarket, one of the best transport inter- changes in the borough and an additional 150 jobs. “We have got to protect every


bit of landscaping we can, as long as it is worth saving, but this was just scrubland. “We have got to think of the employment benefits. These are hard times, and there comes a point when you have to balance what is worth saving and what people need. “There is not much opportu-


nity for part-time work in vil- lages


Supermarkets do offer this. Alongside Sainsbury’s, we couldhavehad 300jobsfor local people, whichwould have helped the economy.”


Visit Downs Mail’s website — downsmail.co.uk like Staplehurst.


‘an afterthought’ RESIDENT Dave Staunton- Lambert criticised Tesco’s pro- posed nature reserve next to the touted car park. Addressing the committee meeting, he said: “The idea of calling it a community garden is a cynical planning after- thought. Not a single parking space has been allocated to vis- itors, school or mobility minibuses or the gardeners themselves. “Wildlife in itwill be isolated


by the new car park. It is often heavily flooded and it is pol- luted at night by the A229 street lamps and by road noise during the day. This is far from being a ‘jewel in the crown’.”


Considering options ATESCO spokesman refused to comment on whether the su- permarket chain would lodge an appeal against Maidstone Council’s refusal to grant plan- ning permission. He said: “We will wait until


we receive formal notification of the decision and explore all the options available to us, whether that would be an ap- peal, a new application or walking away altogether.”


Rival has its say SAINSBURY’S sent the plan- ning committee a lobbying let- ter urging members to refuse the Tesco proposal. “This is the first time in 10 years of running the planning committee that I have received such a letter from opponents,” said committee chairman, Cllr Richard Lusty.


‘One store is enough’


LIB Dem borough councillor Derek Mortimer spoke as a vis- iting member having can- vassed the vil- lage during this year’s KCC elec- tions. Cllr Mortimer (right), who lost outonthe vote for Maidstone Rural South to incumbent Eric Hotson, said: “People are in favour of a su- permarket, and now they have the Sainsbury’s one ready to go they are quite happy. “This is not a brand new


issue, but the threat of having two supermarkets and the ob- vious consequences – if we get two supermarkets they will have to attract customers from far and wide. “This would shine a green


light to future development in Staplehurst.”


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