Developer removes pond that gave area its name
Neighbours of a housing development are asking ‘where has all the water gone?’ after two ponds disappeared from a planning application.
An inspector granted permission for 10 homes in Sutton Valence in April last year despite opposition from the parish and borough councils.
They are being built on the site of The Oaks in Maidstone Road at Warmlake.
The approved application said a summer-dry pond in the southern corner of the triangular site would be enhanced to ensure that it holds water all year round.
In addition a new pond was to have been created in the centre of the development to help with surface water drainage.
But as building gets under way, the old pond has been filled in with rubble, and in an amendment to the application the new pond has disappeared from the site plan to be replaced by a “green”.
Tim Cowen, who has lived opposite since 1999, said: “I understood from Jack Dryland, a previous owner of The Oaks, the old pond was the last remnant of the water that gave the area – Warmlake – its name.” He said: “I have contacted Maidstone council’s enforcement officer, but their attitude was ‘it’s only a little pond, it doesn’t matter’.
“It seems crazy developers are not required to keep to the details of the applications they submit.
“It makes a nonsense of the whole thing, if they can just change their minds at any time.”
Sutton Valence Parish Council has also written to Maidstone council saying: “The council is extremely concerned the pond in the original application, and was to be enhanced, has been filled in.
“This is believed to be the last part of the historic lake the area Warmlake is named after.”
Local legend has it that Warmlake – historically Wormlake – was a source of leeches used medicinally to treat wounds.
Brian Madge, the agent for the developer, Newcourt Residential (The Oaks) Ltd, said a number of revisions were submitted to Maidstone council, including the removal of the pond close to the site entrance.
He said: “The pond is artificial and fully concrete-lined. It served only an ornamental purpose rather than ecological function and was largely dry.
A full ecological survey was undertaken, concluding there were no amphibians present warranting its retention.”