Heathlands Garden Settlement SPD

Search representations

Results for Ms Valerie Woollven search

New search New search

Comment

Heathlands Garden Settlement SPD

Q1: Do you agree with the principle of introducing additional planning guidance for the Heathlands Garden Settlement in the form of a Supplementary Planning Document?

Representation ID: 735

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Ms Valerie Woollven

Representation Summary:

Having followed the Heathland process through from the start, the SPD as it stands today is incomplete and therefore requires further in depth work to satisfy the comments of Government Inspector when he reviewed MBC's Local Plan.


Our response:

Comment noted.
Policy LPRSP4(A) of the Local Plan Review required the preparation of the SPD together with a Landscape Strategy and Transport Assessment which have been produced.
The SPD sets out a range of principles & guidelines, infrastructure and phasing requirements and Officers consider this provides an appropriate level of detail at this stage in the planning process.
Future planning applications will set out more details around the proposed layout of buildings, uses and infrastructure across the site. All future applications will be the subject of consultation and future decision making.

Object

Heathlands Garden Settlement 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: 736

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Ms Valerie Woollven

Representation Summary:

The correct key issues and elements have not been identified in relation to the contect of the site therefore i strongly disagree with the question.


Our response:

Objection noted.
The SPD sets out a contextual background at Chapter 3 of the SPD together with guidance and principles across a number of key themes and topics. It is not made clear which issues are considered to be missing.

Comment

Heathlands Garden Settlement SPD

Q3: Are there any issues and elements which you feel are inaccurate or missing? 

Representation ID: 744

Received: 15/12/2025

Respondent: Ms Valerie Woollven

Representation Summary:

1. There are several landowners whose land appear on the plan but who have not signed any agreement for this development. They probably realise they are being shafted by MBC and Homes England.
2. There has been exceptionally poor communications with LPC and the local community.
3. The preparation of the SPD shows a complete lack of professionalism. Issues such as infrastructure including the supposed new railway station have been skirted round. The Inspector insisted on the latter for the scheme to move forward.
4. The development should be sited on land adjacent to existing major road junctions.


Our response:

Comment noted.
The preparation of the SPD has been led by Maidstone Borough Council working with the site promoter and other key local stakeholders.
Ideas and initial proposals to be included in the SPD were the subject of informal public engagement in May 2025, with several in person engagement events held in Lenham.
The SPD takes forward the requirements of Policy LPRSP4(A) of the Local Plan Review which required the preparation of the SPD, and established the necessary scope of policy requirements including infrastructure.
Figure 19 at Section D of the SPD replicates the required phasing of development and associated infrastructure as was set out in the adopted Local Plan Review.
The overall strategy and policy basis for Heathlands was established by the Local Plan Review which was adopted by the Council in March 2024, following a robust process of debate and scrutiny via an independent ‘Examination in Public’.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.