News |Weald homes


downsmail.co.uk Protesters fail to stop homes


TWO villages in the Weald of Kent are set to expand by 470 homes after Maidstone Council's planning committee gave consent to two large schemes. Stephen Eighteen reports. Campaigners from Headcorn ar-


rived at theTownHall in large num- bers and waved “Protect Headcorn Village” flags. Local shopkeepers provided re- freshments for protesters who boarded a coach that left the village promptly at 5pm. Every seat in the chamber was


filled by campaigners and others ob- served proceedings on a TV screen in a room next door, where they cheered and applauded comments from those backing their cause. For a village that has already


swelled by more than 200 homes in the past four years, thiswas “Head- corn’s biggest battle so far”, accord- ing to campaigners beforehand. “The evidence against development in Headcorn is irrefutable.” Yet itwas all in vain, as Maidstone Council's planning committee granted permission for 220 houses on Hazelpits Farm between Ul- combe Road, Kings Road and Mill Bank.


The development includes open space, a nature conservation area and a change of use of land to a school playing field.


The applicant had already lodged


an appeal for non-determination, so a refusal would have gone straight to the planning inspector. This did not matter to Cllr Lyn


Selby, of Headcorn Parish Council, who urged councillors to turn it down. He said: “Two hundred and twenty houses is an increase of 20% in the number ofdwellings in the vil- lage. It is two-and-a-half times the largest-ever development accepted in the village.” More specific objections related to SouthernWater's assertion – echoed in countless other planning applica- tions – that “there is inadequate ca- pacity in the local network to


A coach full of Headcorn residents headed to the Town Hall to fight a plan for more homes in the village and right, even younger residents had their say


provide foul sewage disposal to service the proposeddevelopment.” Yet only once in a blue moon does SouthernWater lodge a formal ob- jection. The same applies to KCC, which stubbornly will not object on highway grounds unless it considers a risk to safety, which is often like drawing blood from a stone. Were either to do so, Maidstone Council would begin to have grounds to protect the countryside valued so dearly by so many resi- dents in the borough. Instead, in the absence of a local


plan, which would protect sites from development, the council trots out guidance from the National Plan- ning Policy Framework (NPPF), which states a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”, to justify why it so often, albeit re- luctantly, has to sanction the de- struction of greenfield land. The NPPF did not form part of a manifesto or go through readings in Parliament. Itwas a report circulated midway through the previous Cameron-Clegg Government and, with most MPs told by their parties to prioritise new housing over pro- tecting the countryside, therewas lit- tle dissent from the House.


It has left borough and parish councillors, who usually live in the areas they represent and actually care about protecting landscapes that have remained unharmed for generations, fighting a losing battle. Dr Rebecca Driver (below), who


runs research consultancy Analyti- cally Driven, ques- tioned whether Headcorn passed the test of sustain- ability deemed key in the NPPF. It may have a pri- mary school, rail- way


station,


medical centre and thriving High Street, but employ- ment opportunities are limited so new development would incur un- sustainable forms of transport. “This is a dormitory village,” she said. Furthermore, the demand fornew


homeswas low, she claimed. “Estate agents say they struggle to fill devel- opments of more than 30 houses.” There was sympathy from mem-


bers of the committee. Cllr Mike Hoggtried to gain support for amo- tion of refusal on the grounds of a poor sewerage system, lack of em- ployment locally and being contrary


Sewerage concerns are overruled


OBJECTIONS from 39 people failed to prevent plans for 250 homes at Hen and Duckhurst Farm, Marden Road, Staplehurst. The outline planning application, granted by Maidstone Council's planning committee, looked only at access matters. Concerns included the volume of


traffic generated at the traffic lights at the junction of the A229; the use of Oliver Road as a rat-run; the ur- banising effect of a new round- about and a lack of sewerage infrastructure. Neighbour Mr Phipps told the committee of his “disbelief” that of- ficers had recommended granting


16 Maidstone South May 2015


planning permission, citing sewer- age concerns in particular. SouthernWater admitted that the


local network had inadequate ca- pacity to service the proposed de- velopment but the applicant vowed to upgrade the system.


KCC transport officer Peter Rosevear admitted the round- aboutwould be a “dramatic feature”, but said itwould encourage lower traffic speeds.


Committee member Cllr Ian Chittenden said: “There is a contin- uing theme of drainage problems. We have it in Headcorn, Staple-


hurst and Marden. For years the in- frastructure has been causing may- hem. We have to take a stand somewhere.” Cllr John Wilson, a member of


the committee, said: “It is like say- ing we have got a highway that is dangerous and people are being killed but as long aswe build a new road that is okay. We can't accept that the sewerage system is over ca- pacity then build 250 houses.” The two councillorswanted to re-


fuse on sewerage grounds but re- ceived little support. In the end, neither opposed the application. Therewas one vote against, nine in favour and two abstentions.


to Headcorn’s emerging neighbour- hood plan. However, thiswas doomed to fail,


with other councillors fearing that the terms negotiated by officers with the developer – money towards the expansion of Headcorn Primary School and improvements to Corn- wallis Academy; funding to boost the Headcorn and Hoggs Green recreation areas; 40% affordable housing and landscaping details – would be lost if a planning inspector was empowered to decide. “It is not a popularity contest,”


said committee member Cllr Dennis Collins. “Alot of effortwas put in to get section 106 contributions and this would be ignored by an inspector.A refusal now would be short-lived and the people of Headcorn would lose out in the near future.” You could forgive many of the protesters for feeling as though they had already lost out as they trudged out of the Town Hall after seeing nine members of the committee vote in support of the scheme and only two against. The borough's character is being changed forever – and no amount of coach journeys, flags or heartfelt pleas can turn this ferocious tide.


Cash for school


CLLR Joan Buller, from Staplehurst Parish Council, was unhappy that a section 106 contribution of £768,000 was earmarked to ex- pand Headcorn Primary School. “How do we explain to parish-


ioners that we get the houses but Headcorn gets the money? ” A planning officer said because


Staplehurst Primary School is not at capacity, fundswere being directed to the neighbouring village's school. Cllr Clive English, chairman of the committee, said changing this part of the section 106 agreement could mean it being spent on other schools.


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