Plans to turn an Army barracks into a site for 1,300 houses may have hit a serious obstacle.

Invicta Park Barracks is due to be shut in order to convert around 100 acres of Ministry of Defence land into homes.

But Kent County Council (KCC) has flagged serious concerns about the secondary school promised for the Maidstone site and could scupper the scheme in its present form.

The Ministry of Defence barracks is currently home to the 36 Engineers Regiment and the King’s Gurkha Engineers and has been earmarked for closure in 2029, two years later than the original date.

Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) has included the site in its Local Plan Review (LPR) to satisfy imposed government housing targets.

A joint agreement between the Defence Infrastructure Organisation and MBC suggests the site suitable for 1,300 houses and community services, including a secondary school and shops.

KCC is particularly concerned about the proposed school, with significant doubt about the site’s appropriateness.

Papers to the KCC planning applications committee (December 13) state: “The county council has raised concerns that the size and shape of the land identified for the school would not typically be considered appropriate.

“The component parts of a school are typically formed of rectangular shaped elements, such as playing pitches or buildings, which cannot be squeezed within irregularly sized or shaped sites.”

The space within the site would not be conducive to the usual rectangular-shaped buildings associated with schools.

The site has steep gradients, existing houses which must be demolished and mature woodland.

Liberal Democrat borough councillor David Naghi, who will be standing at the next general election in the newly configured Maidstone and Malling constituency, has always been critical of shutting the barracks.

Cllr Naghi said: “The way the world is going at the minute, I’d say we need to keep the barracks, not lose it. This is a town with a long and very proud military history and it would be a crying shame to lose that.

“We should be immensely proud of being home to the Gurkhas, one of the finest fighting forces on the planet, and admire the values the soldiers and their families bring to this community.

“Apart from that, it is totally the wrong site for a housing development and a school. It is the wrong shape, has the wrong dimensions and is in the wrong place. It has woodland that we should be keeping, too. Not to mention the roads are totally choc-a-bloc most of the time. It should be scuppered.

“But the (MBC) Conservatives are in favour of building houses everywhere.”

Conservative chairman MBC’s planning committee, Cllr Denis Spooner, said: “I know there have been a lot of concerns raised about the Invicta site and it doesn’t surprise me that KCC has raised some issue about the school but given a fair wind and if we acknowledge the MoD intends to dispose of the site, I hope we can resolve them.”

Tory MBC leader Cllr David Burton, was unavailable for comment but he said earlier this year: "As I understand it, the strategy behind their (the MoD) thinking is that they are looking to develop fewer, super barracks, that would have facilities that can't be matched by smaller barracks like Invicta."

The LPR does accept that with housing growth there will be a need for additional school places as there will no longer be a surplus.

KCC cautioned if the LPR frustrates its ability to provide additional school places in the borough, some pupils may have to take up the slack on the Isle of Sheppey, in Tonbridge and Malling or as far afield as Dover or Folkestone.

The papers state: “This is absolutely not a situation the county council would wish to be in.”

While KCC views the geographical location of the barracks as “acceptable in broad terms” it is concerned with regards to the deliverability of a school in the time frame in which it would be required.

The authority has called on MBC for greater clarity.

The papers state: “The current position as presented to the County Council raises concerns that there may be barriers to delivery of this infrastructure, which could undermine the effectiveness of the plan’s infrastructure delivery.

“The plan should be flexible to deal with changing circumstances, but there currently does not appear to be flexibility within the Plan for this secondary school to be established at an alternative location.”