Lidsing Garden Community SPD
Search representations
Results for Mrs S Ward search
New searchSupport
Lidsing Garden Community SPD
Q1: Do you agree with the principle of introducing additional planning guidance for the Lidsing Garden Settlement in the form of a Supplementary Planning Document?
Representation ID: 120
Received: 24/11/2025
Respondent: Mrs S Ward
Yes i agree a supplementary planning document would be a good addition to this development as i do not believe surrounding Maidstone settlements have been considered in the planning and the affects this settlement has on them. I believe a supplementary planning document could help alleviate some of these issues.
Support noted.
Object
Lidsing Garden Community SPD
Q2: Do you agree that the correct key issues and elements have been identified in relation to the context of the site?
Representation ID: 121
Received: 24/11/2025
Respondent: Mrs S Ward
No, I believe consideration needs to be given to other settlements surrounding the development.Considerations need to be given to the Boxley road and settlements of Bredhurst and Penenden Heath and the challenges they will face as a result of this development. The Boxley road whilst speed limits vary from 20-40mph sees dangerous driving from the majority of users, as proven by the Boxley Parish Council report.
Comment noted.
Additional commentary has been added to Section 3.3: Constraints and Opportunities to acknowledge wider impacts across adjacent areas.
Figure 18: Infrastructure Requirements as per the Local Plan Review acknowledges the need for necessary off-site highway mitigation.
Principles and guidelines relating to traffic are set out at Chapter 6.6 which requires detailed assessments of impacts on the local and strategic road network and direct reference to minimise impacts on local lanes and neighbouring areas.
The SPD sets out additional guidance on the approach to transport assessment and mitigation (Chapter 7.3) as has been agreed between Maidstone Borough Council, Kent County Council and National Highways.
More detailed assessment of impacts and the design of transport mitigation measures will need to be set out as part of the formulation and consideration of future planning applications.
Comment
Lidsing Garden Community SPD
Q3: Are there any issues and elements which you feel are inaccurate or missing?
Representation ID: 122
Received: 24/11/2025
Respondent: Mrs S Ward
As i say, consideration to surrounding settlements is missing. The M2 access will alleviate some issues but the majority of car users will use Boxley Road to head to Maidstone, i think the development needs to look at making this an unattractive option to make Bluebell Hill and M2 the most sensible and easy option. For settlements like Bredhurst, Boxley and Penenden Heath this is already a dangerous road, and needs to be addressed with the additional usage. Penenden Heath will be at gridlock with the potential new development at the Barracks also. We need to consider infrastructure in planning.
Comment noted.
Additional commentary has been added to Section 3.3: Constraints Opportunities to acknowledge wider impacts across adjacent areas.
Figure 18: Infrastructure Requirements as per the Local Plan Review acknowledges the need for necessary off-site highway mitigation.
Principles and guidelines relating to traffic are set out at Chapter 6.6 which requires detailed assessments of impacts on the local and strategic road network and direct reference to minimise impacts on local lanes and surrounding areas.
The SPD sets out additional guidance on the approach to transport assessment and mitigation (Chapter 7.3).
More detailed assessment of impacts and the design of transport mitigation measures will need to be set out as part of the formulation and consideration of future planning applications.
