Agenda item

Outline Application: Redevelopment to provide up to 85 Class C3 residential units, together with landscaping, open space and other associated works at development site north of 51 Amber Lane, Kings Hill.

 All matters reserved for future approval except for access (Site 5.4)

RESOLVED:  That outline planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

(1)             The proposed development, by virtue of its location, siting, proposed means of access and intensification of residential activities would result in the partial loss (insofar as it relates to the means of access) and deterioration of ancient woodland, which is an irreplaceable habitat. There are no demonstrated reasons which are wholly exceptional to allow for such loss and deterioration to take place and no suitable compensation strategy. Furthermore, there are no acceptable measures proposed that would mitigate the harm that would arise. As such, the development is contrary to the requirements of paragraph 170(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and the associated standing advice of Natural England and the Forestry Commission.

(2)             The proposed development by virtue of its location and siting and the lack of any cohesive or responsive relationship with the nearby residential settlement would be entirely at odds with the prevailing character of the immediate and surrounding environment. As such, the development would be harmful to visual amenity and demonstrably would not respect the site and its surroundings, protect, conserve or enhance local distinctiveness, be sympathetic to local character and history, or take any opportunities for improving the character and quality of the area and the way it functions. The development proposed is therefore contrary to the requirements of policy CP24 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Core Strategy (2007), policy SQ1 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Managing Development and the Environment DPD (2010) and paragraphs 127(c) and 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

(3)             The proposed development by virtue of the form, scale and design of the vehicular and emergency accesses would significantly erode the prevailing character of the site and its immediate surroundings and introduce urbanising features which would cause visual harm to the appearance of the site and locality. The development proposed is therefore contrary to the requirements of policy CP24 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Core Strategy (2007), policy SQ1 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Managing Development and the Environment DPD (2010) and paragraphs 127(c) and 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

(4)             The proposed development by virtue of its overall quantum, size and proposed means of access would cause increased levels of vehicular activity along Amber Lane giving rise to noise and disturbance which would be harmful to the residential amenities of the occupants of properties along Amber Lane. As such, the development is contrary to the requirements of policy CP24 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Core Strategy (2007), policy SQ1 of the Tonbridge and Malling Borough Managing Development and the Environment DPD (2010) and paragraphs 127(c) and 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

(5)             The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that, on the evidence submitted, the proposed access strategy to serve the development can be delivered in a safe and acceptable manner. As such, the development is considered to be contrary to the requirements of policy SQ8 of the Managing Development and the Environment DPD (2010) and paragraph 110 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

[Speakers:  Caroline Bridger – Kings Hill Parish Council; Peter Coulling – Teston Parish Council; Naomi Schilling, Richard Dowling, Mr Fisher, Derek Edmonds, Katie Dodsworth and David Rush – members of the public]