Residents of a quiet cul-de-sac spoke strongly against plans to close a care home on the corner of their street and convert it into 11 flats.
Two public speakers, Dave Elsworth and Peter May, addressing Maidstone council’s planning committee argued that there was no justification for the scheme, since the borough was facing an acute shortage of residential care places and The Vale Care Home in Otterbourne Place currently provided 27 much-needed beds.
Furthermore, the home had gained a Good rating in the last inspection by the Care Quality Commission, which had been carried out as recently as April.
Charing Healthcare told councillors that the nursing home on the corner with Willington Street, which they had been operating for 25 years, was no longer viable.
They had produced a viability assessment to that effect, but the report had not been made available to either the public or to councillors.
The conversion plans included extending the existing building and knocking down the front boundary wall so that the area in front of the building - currently comprising a grass verge - could be used for parking.
Even so, the scheme would still only provide 13 parking spaces for the 11 flats which would be three below the county standard of 16 required.
They also proposed no affordable housing, even though every development over 10 units is required to provide some affordable homes.
Residents said the planned parking arrangement would spoil the look of the area and leave only two on-street parking places for all the other properties in the road.
Nevetheless, planning officers recommended the application be approved, but councillors were minded to agree with the residents.
Cllr Jo Wilkinson (Lab) said: “There is an established need for 1,228 extra care places in Maidstone, yet this application proposes to eliminate an existing valuable care home.
“It has successfully operated for over 25 years - why is it suddenly no longer viable?”
“Its website is filled with glowing reviews. Losing such a community asset would be a tremendous setback.”
Cllr Val Springett (Con) said: “My main concern is the street view. At present it’s lovely; it’s open; it’s green and the wall is fabulous.
”And what we are going to get is just a row of cars. The street view then will be appalling.”
Cllr Denis Spooner (Con) said: “The owners have sold off bits of land for development over the years and have now severely constrained themselves with what they can do.
“I am very upset with the proposed loss of the green verge.”
He suggested that if the owners would enter into a legal agreement whereby future occupiers of the flats - perhaps just the six single-bedroom units proposed - would enter into an agreement not to own a car, then there might be enough on-site parking for the other flats, abrogating the need for the car parking to extend onto the grass verge, which, he said, ”it is essential to protect.”
Cllr Tony Harwood (Lib Dem) was concerned about water run-off and said he wanted assurances about the permeability of the proposed car park hardstanding.
He also suggested there should be some tree planting to improve the landscape, both at the front and on the north and northeast boundaries.
He also wanted to know what renewable energy measures were being taken.
Cllr Stuart Jeffery (Green) said he wanted further investigation as to why no affordable housing was being provided.
The committee voted unanimously to defer the application for discussion with the applicant on reducing the parking, increasing the landscaping, investigating the permeability of the hardstanding, detailing some integrated wildlife enhancements, clarifying the renewable energy measures, and making public the viability assessment.
The proposal is for six one-bed flats, four two-bed flats and one three-bed.
Find out about planning applications that affect you at the Public Notice Portal.
Details of the application can be found on the council’s website under reference number 23/503025.
