The council will no longer argue heritage harm as a reason to refuse 1,300 homes near East Malling. The public inquiry runs on seven days from 8 to 17 December.

Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council has dropped one of its two objections to up to 1,300 homes between East Malling and Hermitage Lane. It will not argue at next month’s public inquiry that harm to the Grade I listed Church of St James the Great is a reason on its own to refuse the scheme.

The Planning Committee took the decision in private on Wednesday 11 November, after legal advice. The council published its record of the decision on 13 November. (Planning Committee record of decision, minute PL 26/87)

Overview

  • The council still opposes the scheme, but now on one ground only: the loss of the ragstone under the site.
  • Harm to the church’s setting will still be weighed in the overall balance. It is no longer a standalone reason for refusal.
  • The inquiry into application 24/00372/OAEA takes place on 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 17 December 2026. The venue has not been confirmed.
  • The Secretary of State, not the council, will make the final decision.

What the committee decided

The record says that, following changes to national planning policy and a review of the evidence by the council’s appointed professional advisers, “the heritage reason for refusal could no longer reasonably be defended as a standalone reason at the inquiry.”

Councillor Palmer proposed and Councillor Davis seconded a three-part resolution. It was carried. The committee resolved that:

  1. the heritage reason for refusal be withdrawn and not defended at the inquiry
  2. the minerals reason for refusal continue to be defended
  3. the identified heritage harm continue to be addressed as part of the overall planning balance

Members also discussed the Sustainable Movement Corridor, the proposed road link from New Road in East Malling to Kiln Barn Road. The record notes debate on its relationship with nearby heritage assets, the bus provision planned for it, and the need to stop it becoming a general-purpose route for traffic.

The report and counsel’s advice behind the decision are exempt, on the grounds of legal professional privilege. Neither has been published. (Planning Committee, 11 November 2026: agenda and decisions)

Why it matters

The heritage ground was one of only two the committee settled on in July, when councillors went against their officers’ advice and resolved that they were minded to refuse. It said the corridor, because of its extent and closeness to the church, would cause “less than substantial harm” that outweighed its benefits.

The other ground, which the council will still defend, is about minerals. The committee found that the homes would sterilise a substantial deposit of Hythe Formation Ragstone. It also found too little evidence that digging it out first would be impractical or uneconomic. (Planning Committee printed minutes, 30 July 2026)

Because the scheme is over 150 homes, the council could not issue a refusal itself. The Secretary of State called the application in in August and will decide it after the inquiry.

The scheme

The outline application was made by the East Malling Trust and covers land east of Kiln Barn Road and west of Hermitage Lane, in Aylesford parish. It includes:

  • up to 1,300 homes, including affordable housing
  • a new village centre with a primary school
  • commercial, community and employment space
  • parkland, open space and children’s play areas
  • the Sustainable Movement Corridor from New Road, East Malling to Kiln Barn Road

(Application 24/00372/OAEA on the council’s planning portal)

What it means for you

The inquiry is the next point at which the case for and against the homes will be heard in public. It runs over two weeks:

  • Tuesday 8 to Friday 11 December
  • Tuesday 15 to Thursday 17 December

The council says the venue will be confirmed once it knows how many people want to attend. It is asking anyone who expects to go to one or more sessions to fill in its registration form, so it can book a room of the right size.

If you objected to the scheme on heritage grounds, your comments remain on the file. But the council, as the main opponent at the inquiry, will no longer make that argument as a reason for refusal on its own.

Sources