Heathlands Garden Settlement SPD

Comment

Representation ID: 801

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 03 November 2025 which was received by Natural England on the same date.

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.
To inform our comments we have reviewed the following documents made available to us during the consultation period:
•Heathlands Garden Settlement Supplementary Planning Document (October 2025)
•Heathlands, Maidstone SPD: Landscape Strategy (July 2025)
•HGC Ecology SPD Evidence Base (August 2025)
•HGC Nutrient Neutrality SPD Evidence Base (August 2025)
We would like to thank your authority for your work in developing this SPD but we feel that further detail is required to ensure that the development meets the criteria set out in LPRSP4(A).

In our view, the SPD should incorporate a Strategic Masterplan and Design Code to ensure that good quality design is implemented from the outset, rather than attempting to embed these at the later planning stages. If this cannot be provided as part of the SPD then we recommend that a separate document is produced and agreed prior to the submission of an outline application.

Furthermore, we recommend that clarity is provided on the weight of the Landscape Strategy (July 2025) in decision making as this is not currently clear. If the Landscape Strategy has been developed as more of an evidence base, then we recommend that certain elements (e.g. high level landscape codes, structural planting parameters) are brought into the SPD to ensure that they will be considered by the applicant.

Please note that we have not provided comments on all aspects of the SPD, only those which are relevant to our remit. Our answers to the specific questions posed can be found in Annex 1 and further comments can be found in Annex 2.

We would be happy to comment further should the need arise but if, in the meantime, you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact us.

Do you have any other comments on the Draft Supplementary Planning Document?
We have set out further comments on the Draft SPD and Landscape Strategy in Annex 2.

Comment noted.
The principles set out at Chapter 10.1 require a site wide Strategic Masterplan and a Strategic Design Code must be submitted as part of the future outline planning applications.
Chapter 9.3 of the SPD sets out guidance around pre-application working including the need to engage with the local community and relevant local stakeholders to inform the preparation of planning applications and all related supporting information including masterplans and design codes.
The SPD sets out principles and guidelines relating to 'Green Infrastructure & Landscape' (Chapter 6.2). The 'Landscape Strategy' is a separate supporting document which includes additional assessment and information. Key aspects identified in the Landscape Strategy have been drawn across into the SPD.
The Landscape Strategy is referenced at Paragraph 6.2.2, and at Principles (L) and (M) in reference to 'Landscape & Visual Impacts'. Officers agree that this could be made more prominent. The Landscape Strategy will also be published alongside any adopted SPD.

Comment

Representation ID: 802

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Given the location of the site in the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape (KDNL) and the quantum of development proposed, we not only agree with the principle of producing a SPD but feel it is central to delivering a truly landscape-led development which protects and enhances the setting of the KDNL by ensuring good design, appropriate location of buildings and natural screening.

Comment noted.

Comment

Representation ID: 803

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

As the site is located within the upper Stour catchment and therefore subject to nutrient neutrality requirements, we recommend that the need to mitigate additional nutrients entering the catchment as a result of the development is listed as a key element to be considered (Figure 9).

Comment noted.
Officers consider that the principles and guidelines set out at Chapter 6.3 in relation to Blue Infrastructure are appropriate requirements in relation to water management.

Comment

Representation ID: 804

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Natural England supports the Vision & Objectives for Heathlands Garden Settlement, in particular its focus on providing a ‘landscape-led settlement’ and the importance it places on responding to the landscape setting. We are also pleased to see that both the vision and objectives reference the need to safeguard existing ecological assets while providing new green spaces, and highlight the imporance of connecting these via a ‘green network’.

Comment (support) noted.

Comment

Representation ID: 805

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

In our opinion there could be more focus on providing spaces for biodiversity within the Vision, as currently the ‘Green Integration’ section focuses on providing landscaped spaces for the benefit of future residents (i.e. village greens, parks). We therefore recommend that this section be reworded to:
‘There will be a sensitive transition between the National Landscape and Heathlands, with strong planting in the northern parcels, and landscaped spaces for village greens, parks, commons, and naturalistic biodiverse green spaces throughout.’

Comment noted.
The SPD tasks forward the same vision for Heathlands that was set out in the adopted Local Plan Review.
The vision is supported by a set of specific design objectives that collectively cover the key elements of how proposals at Heathlands Garden Settlement must come forward. The first of these is being 'Landscape Led' which recognises the need to protect existing landscape and ecological assets and provide substantial new areas of open spaces for people to enjoy and for biodiversity to flourish.

Comment

Representation ID: 806

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Having reviewed the framework plans (Figures 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15) we are pleased to see the inclusion of a strategic green corridor, in particular in the proposed location along the River Stour as this maximises opportunities to link up existing access routes (PRoW) and communities with new services and the proposed country park via active travel modes.
We support the inclusion of the east-west structural planting in Figure 10, as required by LPRSP4(A) (3b), as well as structural planting on the northern boundary and in key areas of Parcel B. While we support the inclusion of green connections throughout the site, we note that there is an opportunity to connect these with existing access routes to the KDNL which does not appear to have been maximised.
Looking at Figure 13, we are pleased to see that limited built development is directed to the north of Parcel A, however we note that employment and sports provision, a local centre and primary school are proposed in the south of the parcel. Though this is further away from the KDNL boundary it is important to acknowledge that these buildings will still need to be sensitively designed taking into consideration aspects such as scale, building height and orientation, lighting and colour to ensure they are not of detriment to the landscape setting.

Comment noted.
Officers agree that additional guidance should be included in relation to the principles for Chapter 6.6 in relation to 'Placemaking, Density & Character' to replicate the wording as set out in LPRSP4(A)(3)(d) from the Local Plan review which refers to a number of factors that will influence the sensitive design of buildings.
The detailed design of green infrastructure measures and corridors including the consideration of options to integrate into wider areas of open space will need to be set out as part of the formulation and consideration of future planning applications.

Comment

Representation ID: 807

Received: 16/12/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Though we support the creation of a Placemaking Framework (Figure 14) to inform good design, we are concerned that only small areas of Parcel A are marked for lower density development as well as opportunities for higher density development indicated along the principle movement corridor.
As highlighted in pre-consultation engagement between Natural England, Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) and KDNL Unit, development in Parcel A should be a maximum of 2 storeys so as not to intercept key views from the KDNL. We therefore recommend that the ‘indicative opportunity for higher density’ shading is removed from Parcel A at this stage or alternatively, building parameters included within the SPD (i.e. density, height, massing) for each parcel.
In addition, it is unclear to us how MBC intends for the future applicant(s) to utilise these framework plans in formulating their approach to the development. In the absence of a Strategic Masterplan developed through the SPD, we recommend the addition of the following text in paragraph 5.1.5:
‘A final plan draws together the key elements into an overall composite spatial framework. Future applicants must demonstrate how their planning application/masterplan is in accordance with the framework.’

Comment noted.
The SPD captures the key structuring elements and principles, whilst also allowing for appropriate flexibility for further design work to consider matters in more detail and bring forward appropriate proposals. Aspects marked as 'indicative' also provides flexibility to allow for more detailed work to consider suitability and impacts.
Officers agree that additional guidance should be included in relation to the principles for Chapter 6.6 in relation to 'Placemaking, Density & Character' to replicate the wording as set out in LPRSP4(A)(3)(d) from the Local Plan review which refers to a number of factors that will influence the sensitive design of buildings.
Future planning applications will set out more details around the proposed layout of buildings, uses and infrastructure across the site.
Future planning applications will need to consider and address all the identified issues and requirements, will be the subject of consultation and future decision making.