Heathlands Garden Settlement SPD

Comment

Representation ID: 620

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

Are there any plans for a dedicated SEN school to be built in the development. This is needed along with free early years placements.
Are there any plans for dentists along with the doctors surgery that will be needed. The doctors and dentists in the local villages are full now.
Will the sports facilities be free to use, again who is paying for them to be built.
Will all play areas be dog free.
Will there be dedicated secure dog walking areas.

Comment noted.
The guidelines and principles relating to Education at Chapter 6.9 states that all educational requirements must align to the latest guidance issued by Kent County Council, which will provide wider information on matters such as SEN.
The guidelines also set out requirements for health, sports and community facilities.
The delivery of appropriate local facilities will be a matter that future developers and planning applications will need to address.

Comment

Representation ID: 621

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

A SEN school needs to be part of the development and in phase 1 along with early years and primary school.

Comment noted.
The SPD takes forward the requirements of Policy LPRSP4(A) of the Local Plan Review
The guidelines and principles relating to Education at Chapter 6.9 states that all educational requirements must align to the latest guidance issued by Kent County Council, which will provide wider information on matters such as SEN.
Figure 18 of the SPD sets out the infrastructure requirements as per the Local Plan Review which includes the provision of a primary schools as part of Phase 1.

Comment

Representation ID: 622

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

Employment areas need to be placed near the A20 junctions to stop traffic driving round the development. Given the ethos of limiting traffic on the site for safety of the residents.

Comment noted.
Employment areas will need to located sensitively across the proposals and cannot be located directly adjacent to the A20 to protect the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape.

Comment

Representation ID: 623

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

Place all employment areas near the A20 junctions and not dotted around the site. Most if not all workers deliveries and traffic will be arriving from off the development so to reduce traffic on site it makes sense. Your cycle routs will allow workers on time development to get to their place of work without the use of a car.

Comment noted.
Employment areas will need to located sensitively across the proposals and cannot be located directly adjacent to the A20 to protect the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape.
Paragraph 6.11.9. of SPD refers to the need to provide a network of 'greenways' for pedestrians and cyclists to connect residential areas with the rail station, mobility hubs, parks, local and district centres and employment areas

Comment

Representation ID: 624

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

There must be no access from lenham heath road to your development to stop traffic using our narrow lanes as a rat run to the development. Also when the M20 is closed, and all traffic uses the A20 the surrounding lanes block up with traffic trying to avoid the traffic on the A20. This will be made worse by the extra thousands of cars from the development
The development should be car free with all cars parked away from the residential areas.
Busses should be the only traffic driving around the site with all deliveries dropped off at the hubs.

Comment noted.
The SPD sets out principles and guidelines relating to 'Movement & Connectivity' (6.11) to promote active travel and to establish sustainable travel principles from the outset.
Principles and guidelines also require detailed assessments of impacts on the local and strategic road network and directly reference the need to minimise impacts on local lanes.
Officers agree that the issues should also reference wider potential impacts across the area, and additional commentary has been added to Chapter 3.3: Constraints Opportunities to acknowledge wider impacts across adjacent areas.
The SPD sets out principles and guidelines relating to 'Placemaking, Density & Character' (6.4) to achieve a high quality place and Chapter 10 of the SPD sets out the approach to Design Coding to secure quality. The Design Code can consider how streets should be designed, including consideration of areas which may be suitable to come forward as 'car free'.

Comment

Representation ID: 625

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

No access from the surrounding lanes onto your development to stop them becoming more congested.

Comment noted.
Principles and guidelines also require detailed assessments of impacts on the local and strategic road network and direct reference to minimise impacts on local lanes.
The detailed design of transport mitigation measures will need to be set out as part of the formulation and consideration of future planning applications.

Comment

Representation ID: 626

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

I agree with all properties having solar panels on their roofs, heat pumps and grey water recycling units.
No property to be concreted over for parking all parking to be water permeable and no fake grass to be allowed on the development.
Trees and bushes to be planted and natural ponds for rain water run off. No water should be allowed to drain from the roads into the water courses as they do now. The great stour floods our garden every year so no extra water must be allowed to flow into it.

Comment noted.
The SPD includes chapters that set out principles and guidelines relating to 'Blue Infrastructure' (6.4) which includes measures relating to on site water management and use of Sustainable Urban Drainage approaches.
The SPD includes chapters that set out principles and guidelines relating to 'Placemaking, Density & Character' (6.4) to achieve a high quality place and Chapter 10 of the SPD sets out the approach to Design Coding to secure quality. The Design Code will need to consider the appropriate approach to suitable materials, public and green spaces.

Comment

Representation ID: 627

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

A separate water treatment plant needs to be built to supply the development, all surrounding water pipe work needs renewing as it burst regularly and causes lenham heath road to be closed to traffic the last time was over 10 weeks.

Comment noted.
The SPD takes forward the requirements of Policy LPRSP4(A) of the Local Plan Review which established the necessary scope of infrastructure for the Heathlands site, including the need for new/improved wastewater treatment as part of Phase 1, as set out in Figure 19.
The guidelines and principles at Chapter 6.3 of the SPD in relation to 'Blue Infrastructure and Wastewater Treatment' require development proposals to demonstrate how foul water will be appropriately managed, including provision of an improved or new wastewater treatment facility.

Comment

Representation ID: 629

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

No cost for the upkeep and maintenance of heathlands should be passed onto the residents of heathland or local community. It should all be paid for by the developers. No management company employed at residents cost.

Comment noted.
As set out at paragraph 11.1.9, the consideration and evaluation of options leading to a preferred approach will need to be set out within a Stewardship Strategy that will confirm the scope of the stewardship and community governance arrangements and its financial sustainability.

Comment

Representation ID: 631

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kerrison

All road links Ito the development from the M20 junctions either end of the A20 need to be upgraded at the developers expense and completed before the first phase of the development is completed. This should be non negotiable and written into the planning conditions.

Comment noted.
Officers agree that the issues should also reference wider potential impacts across the area.
Additional commentary has been added to Chapter 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.