More on KentOnline
More on KentOnline
The battle over a huge housing scheme proposed in Otham may be won, but the war is not over, councillors have warned.
On Tuesday, Maidstone Council threw out plans for 421 homes around Grade 1 St Nicholas Church, in Church Road, for the third and final time.
The planning committee had twice voted to refuse the plans but the decision was then given to the policy and resources committee, over fears of significant costs associated with that decision.
Council officials fear the developer, Bellway, could win an appeal, resided over by the planning inspectorate, a government agency, and ordered to pay costs of up to £165,000.
Officials had recommended the proposal was given the greenlight.
Policy and resources committee members voted to refuse the scheme on traffic and road safety concerns. KCC had previously objected to the scheme, saying the access along Church Road is not suitable and the development would pose hazards to drivers using the narrow country lane.
Bellway has confirmed it will appeal the decision and already has an appeal lodged over the non-determination of separate outline application.
Cllr Clive English, chairman of the planning committee and a member of the policy and resources committee, has seen close-up the saga unfold over the last few months.
Cllr English, who voted for the application to be refused last night, said: "I felt we had just enough grounds courtesy of KCC. We were focused on the very local traffic issues that apply to this application."
Speaking about the chances of winning at the appeal, Cllr English said: "It's going to be one of the hardest ones definitely. You have got some planning applications which are easy to see you go one way or the other. But we will defend it vigorously.
The appeal will be hard, he said, because the site is allocated in 2017 adopted Local Plan, as pointed out by officers.
It has also been pointed out that rejecting the appeal puts the council's five year land supply at risk, which could mean the authority loses control over where news homes are built.
However, Cllr English said he didn't think that was a major problem, saying there are "dozens" of more suitable proposals coming through, such as a scheme to turn an empty care showroom into 159 apartments in Maidstone town centre.
Cllr Robert Eves, also a member of both committees, said the scheme would have blighted the community, adding: “This was a singular battle in a long war”.
The motion to refuse the application was passed with 11 votes for and four against.
Cllr Fay Gooch, whose vote on the motion meant she backed the application, said hers was a “knife edge decision”, eventually swayed by the site’s allocation in the Local Plan.
She said: “I was thinking ‘God no we can’t do this,’ but at the end of the day we have got a local plan and we went through hell to get it. You have to scrape away the emotion and look at the policies.
"Bellway have put in an application which is legitimate, which complies with policies in the local plan.”
Cllr Eves, who represents Maidstone's North ward, questioned the process which saw the 421-homes scheme examined again, after the planning committee already had its say.
In May nine councillors voted to refuse the application, with three voting against that motion and one abstention, leading to the decision being deferred. In June the vote against the application was passed with 10 for, two against and one abstention.
This process followed the council’s constitution and accordingly, as the committee had been advised by officers that their decision could have “significant cost implications”, it was deferred to the policy and resources group.
However, Cllr Robert Eves said: “I know it's in the constitution but I feel it was an opportunity for officers to try to take away the legitimate decision of the elected members. I think what has been missed by officers is that we didn’t consider the cost risk - we did.
"There’s a strong chance the council can win at appeal.”
But council leader, Martin Cox, who as chairman of the policy and resources committee voted against the motion to refuse the plans, denied the claims, saying there is a process to make sure everything is done transparently.
Cllr Cox said: "If the planning committee make a decision as part of the process they are given an opportunity to review the situation.
"This is a process, this is the constitution setting out the way we are supporting residents. It's a bit like being told you have got a terminal illness and going to another doctor."
