This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
News | M20 Junction 8


Idea for A249 estate after J8 plan refused


THE refusal of warehousing near M20 J8 could result in the extension of


the Detling Aerodrome Business Estate and a new A249 roundabout. The decision to submit a plan-


ning application to extend the es- tate by 20 hectares was made the day after Maidstone Council’s planning committee turned down Gallagher Properties’ 10.2-hectare proposal for a new business park in Waterside Park, south of the A20 Ashford Road. Landowner EJ Mackelden&Sons


Ltd says the development would fund a £5m roundabout close to the Bimbury Lane end of the A249, to- gether with an internal link road to Kent showground. “The plan has several major ad-


vantages for the Maidstone area,” said a company spokesman. “It meets Maidstone’s need for adequate high-quality business space and is well located to motor- ways – both the M20 and the M2. “It is an extension of a well-es- tablished business estate which lives happily with neighbours and respects this part of an Area of Out- standing Natural Beauty. “It provides a desperately needed roundabout on this section of the A249 plus a 700m-long link


road to take showground traffic off the A249, with substantial queue- ing space.” It would


Nick Yandle


also elimi- nate left-in, left-out ma- noeuvres to and from the site and showground and control traffic speeds on the A249.


The spokesman added: “Our landscape consultant’s report shows business expansion can be absorbed within the natural topog- raphy, without significant impact or harm to the AONB. It is so well hidden most people do not know of its existence.” The 10.5-hectare business estate opened in 1964. In the past the council has indicated opposition to its expansion because of theAONB status. An application is expected in the near future. The council may have to contest a


second appeal on the Waterside Park site after the planning com- mittee refused the scheme for the second time. The first appeal is due to be heard in the New Year. NickYandle, the developer’s chief executive, said: “All is not lost – the appeal on the original application for Waterside Park is already un- derway and this latest refusal can also be appealed.” Planning consent would have en-


abled Marden-based companies Scarab and ADL to move into Wa- terside Park, but the planning com- mittee felt the development would have been out of keeping with the open countryside and AONB. Mr Yandle added: “The decision


will discourage investors, develop- ers and businesses who might oth- erwise consider Maidstone for their ambitious and growing companies. Relocating Scarab andADLclose to the motorway will preserve existing jobs, create new jobs and prevent dozens of HGV journeys through villages and the town centre.”


Waterside Park turned down again


GALLAGHER Properties has been thwarted for the second time in its quest to get planning consent for a newindustrial estate offM20Junc- tion 8 near Hollingbourne. In February, Maidstone Council refused planning permission for its application to build 56,000sqm of warehouses on 11.7 hectares of land, calledWaterside Park, south of A20 Ashford Road and east of Old Mill Road.


Despite a respective reduction in


size to 45,000sqm and 10.2 hectares, the planning committee’s decision on the resubmitted application was the same, with five Lib Dems, an in- dependent and Ukip councillor out- voting the five Conservatives who were against refusal. Cllr Tony Harwood reiterated the


same grounds for refusal as he had previously: the overall scale, mass and design of the building, together with its topography, would be detri- mental to the character of the coun- tryside and Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. He called the scheme, which was also contrary to policy, “grotesque”. Despite objections from all neigh- bouring parish councils, 60 resi- dents, Leeds Castle, CPRE Protect


28


the committee, was in favour of the scheme, emphasising it was much smaller than the planned 117-hectare Kent International Gateway (KIG) freight interchange on nearby land that was refused on appeal four years ago. He said: “If KIG had not occurred


Kent, KCC Planning and local MP Sir Hugh Robertson, officers recom- mended the go-ahead, claiming the scheme’s economic benefits out- weighed the harm caused to the countryside and loss of grade two agricultural land. But the committee’s decision was


a blow to Marden-based companies Automotive Distributors (ADL) and Scarab Sweepers, which want to move to Waterside Park after out- growing their headquarters at the Wheelbarrow Industrial Estate. John Foster, Maidstone Council’s economic development manager, pointed out that a recent report set a target of 14,000 new jobs in Maid- stone by 2031 and the potential loss of ADL and Scarab to sites outside the borough could mean increasing this figure to 17,000. Chris Garland, the former council leader and a substitute member of


Maidstone Town December 2014


at all then this would not be such an issue. The need for 3,000 jobs cannot be overlooked. Not everyone can af- ford to spend £300 per month to get a train to London or get to Medway for work.” Cllr Val Springett, representing Bearsted, cited a study that estab- lished a target for 6,500sqm ofware- house space for the borough in the next 17 years, meaning the scheme would create an oversupply. Cllr Martin Cox, a committee member, said: “This will spoil the countryside. We must listen to the 23,000 peoplewhosurround this site and must not be swayed by the goal of money coming into the town.” An appeal is due to be heard on


the original scheme in theNewYear. Gallagher’s chief executive Nick Yandle would not confirm after the meeting if the company would also lodge an appeal against the latest de- cision.


downsmail.co.uk


Town ‘looks shut for business’


Continued from page one


companies such asADL and Scarab leave the borough. Both are based in Marden but had hoped Waterside Park could offer them more room. Cllr Harper said: “The local econ-


omy has been underperforming since 2008 compared to large parts of Kent and the South East. More resi- dents have to look for work outside the borough. Now it looks like the borough is shut for business.” But council leader Annabelle Blackmore said: “It would be wrong for the council to undermine the de- cision of the planning committee.” She said such an approach could


leave the council open to “significant cost” as an appeal for the first refusal had already been lodged. The motion comes twoweeks after


a report by commercial property consultant GVA, commissioned by the council, claimed J8was the only area in the borough that could fully meet future employment demands. Aswell asWaterside Park, Wood-


cut Farm – north of the A20 and closer to Bearsted – is subject to an application forwarehouses, from de- veloper Roxhill. The council’s John Foster told members that Maidstone’s economy had lost a large number of jobs since 2009. He said the council should be ambitious in a bid to create 14,400 jobs, by stimulating entrepreneur- ship, enhancing the town centre, en- couraging start-ups and improving the infrastructure. Headcorn Cllr Martin Round and


Cllr Clive English felt companies should be encouraged to move out of the town centre, leaving it to be re- developed with housing. Councillors voted to accept the principle of employment develop- ment in the area around J8, provided restrictions could be imposed which limited it to a specific site. The meeting between the plan-


ning, transport and development scrutiny committee and the eco- nomic and commercial development scrutiny committee heard Maid- stone had enough sites, but of the wrong kind for development. CllrVal Springett,whochaired the meeting, suggested Detling Aero- drome as an alternative site, but planning chief Rob Jarman said this would affected the listed ruins of Bimbury Castle, causing outrage among supporters of the “green gateway to the Weald” and Leeds Castle. The economic and commercialde-


velopment committee voted to sup- port development at J8 with associated safeguards, but the plan- ning scrutiny committee voted for maximum mitigation before they would support any development.


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