Two garden village communities can go ahead as part of a town’s Local Plan Review, a government inspector has concluded.

Inspector David Spencer has spent the past two years examining the plan put forward by Maidstone council setting out where development in the borough should be allowed over the next 15 years.

Three key components are the creation of a 5,000-home garden village at Lenham Heath, a 2,000-home garden settlement at Lidsing on the border with the Medway Towns, and the redevelopment of the Invicta Park Barracks site in Maidstone town centre for 1,300 homes.

The first two generated hundreds of objections from the existing local residents, who were said to be “dismayed” at the inspector’s conclusions in his final report delivered earlier this month, with one declaring it “a disaster.”

Mr Spencer found that each of the proposals as presented in the council’s original submission back in 2002 was “unsound” – but that with the appropriate modifications that he suggested, all of them could be made acceptable.

Maidstone already has a Local Plan that was adopted in 2017, but this review is to meet the increased demand for housing identified since then.

The original plan provided for 883 new homes each year. The review increases that by 31% to an average of 1,157 per year.

The inspector acknowledged that this would potentially adversely affect the environment, but took the view that with appropriate mitigation measures “the effects would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing much needed homes and supporting a strong, competitive economy in the borough.”

Although much of the focus of attention has been on the two garden communities, Mr Spencer pointed out that, over the whole plan period, 60% of the housing growth and 37% of the planned employment growth would be within the Maidstone urban area.

Part of that would be at Invicta Park Barracks, which the Ministry of Defence says it will close by 2029.

Submitted for a maximum of 1300 homes, the inspector said the wording should be changed to allow some “flexibility” – ie a possible increase to more than 1300.

However, he insisted policies would be needed to shield listed buildings and the “sylvan" woodland within the site, and also to ensure that a Hindu place of worship (associated with the Gurkhas) remained after the development.

Supporters of a Leeds/Langley Bypass are also likely to be disappointed after the inspector concluded that a policy reserving a corridor for housing development that would help pay for the new road was “unsound” and needed to be dropped.

He said that delivering a relief road to connect the A274 to Junction 8 of the M20, would likely require the construction of an additional 4,000 homes to fund the road, which is currently costed at £57m.

Although he did not rule out this being reinstated in later iterations of the plan.

At Heathlands, the inspector noted that the garden village would “in its early stages result in notable landscape and visual harm.”

To counter that, he required a number of policy changes to beef-up landscaping protection.

He also required the provision of a new railway station as being a key element that made the site sustainable. Previously, the station had been only talked of as a possibility.

Mr Spencer said: “It will be necessary to modify the policy to confirm a railway station is to be delivered.”

He further said this should come forward during the first phase of development.

The site would also require off-site highway interventions on the A20 and at Junction 8 of the M20.

Even so, he expected the first housing could be delivered by 2031.

Mr Spencer said: “I acknowledge that the viability of Heathlands is marginal.

“The latest viability work identifies that build costs have increased approximately 30% since 2021.

“At a high level, Heathlands has been valued as a £1.8billion development.

“In headline terms, that means that the scheme would be viable based on 40% affordable housing and approximately £100m spent on infrastructure.

“But,” he said: “The viability surplus is modest and any moderate movement of 5% increase in costs or decrease in sales values would present a viability risk.”

He said: “The overall viability of Heathlands is slender and that is a matter that needs to be closely followed.”

At Lidsing, he was more confident.

Mr Spencer said: “Lidsing at present values would be a £737m development.

“The latest viability assessment shows that the development would be viable based on 40% affordable housing and some £77.6m spent on infrastructure.

“There is a clearer viability for Lidsing compared with Heathlands, such that it would require notable decreases in values or increases in costs to render the scheme unviable.”

Mr Spencer acknowledged that “to a significant degree, the Lidsing proposal would be regarded as part of the wider Medway urban conurbation” and he noted that Medway Council was opposed to the allocation.

But with an improved connection to the adjacent M2 Junction 4, and with measures to discourage traffic from journeying through Boxley and Bredhurst, the proposal could be sound.

Creating a fourth arm to Junction 4 of the M2 would require replacing the existing Maidstone Road overbridge with a new realigned bridge and a new arc of approach road to the south.

He thought the first Lidsing homes might be delivered as early as 2029.

Other housing allocations in the Local Plan Review also remain, but often with increased mitigation measures.

They include 998 more homes at Lenham and 250 homes at Abbeygate Farm in Tovil.

The inspector concluded that because of the delay caused by the lengthy examination process, the plan would need to be extended to 2039.

Over that time period a minimum of 19,669 homes would be required.

But in change from previous plans, he said the housing should be provided in a “stepped trajectory.”

The target would be 1,157 homes in the first year, stepping down to 1,000 a year from years 2 to 6, before stepping up to 1,150 homes per year in years 7 to 12, and stepping up again to circa 1,350 dwellings in the latter parts of the plan.

The approach reflects the delays in bringing forward the garden village schemes.

Even so, Mr Spencer suggested the plan would still result in a small housing shortfall of 279 homes, which, he said, was not sufficient to declare the plan unsound.

The inspector’s report will be considered by Maidstone council cabinet members at a meeting on Tuesday night, before being presented to a full council meeting on Wednesday, where councillors will be asked to adopt the plan, with the inspector’s modifications.

Cllr Janetta Sams (Ind) said the community in Lenham was “dismayed” at the inspector’s conclusions.

She said: “The proposal to sign off on MBC’s own Heathlands development for 5,000 homes at Lenham has left many questioning the whole process.”

“This Local Plan is a disaster for everyone living in the borough.”

John Britt is the chairman of Lenham Parish Council. He said: “We have fought the proposal for a new town with 5,000 houses at Lenham Heath from the moment we found out about it via a leak to the press.

“Lenham already has agreed to deliver 1,000 new homes up to 2031.

“To quote a line from the recent drama about the Post Office scandal, ‘We’re just little people fighting the system.’

“The arrogance and protectionism with which this proposal has been played, both in and out of the spotlight, is unbelievable.”

Kate Hammond is the spokesman for the Save Our Heath Lands campaign. She said: “We are not surprised.

“This Local Plan goes no way to resolving the many existing issues in Maidstone.

“Residents have been repeatedly calling for the right infrastructure to be provided including better roads, new doctors’ surgery and more school provision.

“Instead MBC has chosen to destroy over 1,400 acres of greenfield land and pollute our waterways in the borough.

“Any councillors who vote this through in the hope that nobody notices will have no integrity in claiming they protect the environment and the borough’s green spaces and when it comes to May’s elections, we’ll make sure residents are made aware of their voting records.”

Cllr Sams said: “It is not an accident that this is all being done just before the election purdah.

“Many councillors want it done and dusted before the Borough and Parish election period begins.

“Then after May, all the new councillors will be left to pick up the pieces and face the serious ramifications of their decision.”

Eddie Powell is the chairman of Harrietsham Parish Council. He said: “The devil is in the detail, and this plan has no detail.

“Its viability is marginal and without a change in the current economic environment, the figures are unworkable.”

Cllr Tom Sams is also an Independent councilor for Harrietsham and Lenham, along with his wife Janetta. Talking about Heathlands, he said: “This is a recipe for gridlock and congestion.

“Building on our green open and food-producing spaces is absolute madness.

“The inspector has afforded MBC such a scope of latitude to render the proposal almost without boundaries, checks or balances.

“It can only be a car-reliant development where vehicles will constantly be choked at the Hollingbourne roundabout on the A20.”

Vanessa Jones is the Independent councillor for Boxley Ward, which will include the Lidsing garden development.

She said: “It is bitterly disappointing that the inspector has found this Local Plan to be ‘sound.’

“Such development will totally destroy the area and negatively impact the lives of thousands of people.

“The speed at which the council is rushing to adopt the plan before the May elections is grotesque.”

The full council meeting on Wednesday starts at 6.30pm and can be viewed live on the council’s YouTube channel here.