Warehousing plan near KIG site Continued from page one
emerging Core Strategy. The most signifi- cant other site is 25 hectares of landwest of junction 8 at Woodcut Farm, north of the A20, which was part of the fiercely-opposed KIG proposal. Gallagher is keen to demonstrate that its
land south of the A20 is a more fitting loca- tion for an industrial park. Quoting a Maid- stone Council site assessment study, the company’s supporting statement said: “Even though both sites are in agricultural use, and theWoodcut Farm site is noted to have an “undeveloped countryside charac- ter”, only the proposed site is judged to ex- perience adverse landscape effects as a result of the loss of that rural character. “The Woodcut Farm site is rated one
grade better (negative as opposed to very negative) than the proposed site in terms of land use, landscape and the historic envi- ronment. That judgement does not appear to be justified by the actual circumstances, which are that theWoodcut Farm site is sig- nificantly closer to the AONB [Area of Out- standing Natural Beauty] boundary than the proposed site, and is more visible from some points within the AONB. “The Woodcut Farm site is not well con- tained, and is highly visible from both the A20 and the M20.” Because the Gallagher proposal is well-
The view south from the proposed site
bounded, the developer also argues that there would be no creeping development, while the potential for this exists at Wood- cut Farm. The statement added: “Because the change [of use] in terms of the lowering of levels within the site is designed to create low level development platforms and effec- tively screen the new buildings in most ex- ternal views, the effects of that change would be limited. “The change within the site would be sub- stantial, but the net effects of that change on the landscape would be minimal.” A public footpath would need to be di- verted if the scheme got the go-ahead. It cur-
MAIDSTONE’s Liberal Democrat group has been fiercely opposed to development on this site from the outset because of possible river contamination and the risk of a bridgehead being created be- tween the site and open countryside towards Otham and the south. The site is home to internationally protected species of wildlife. Lib Dem leader Cllr FranWilson said: “This site
has serious issues. In ecological terms, it has the River Len running along its southern boundary, a stream along its eastern boundary and, to enable development of the size proposed,major land-cut and infill would be necessary, which would have profoundly negative impacts in visual and eco- logical terms. It is also in the foreground of the AONB, close to Leeds Castle.” KCC Cllr Jenny Whittle said she was “very dis- appointed” with Maidstone’s failure to put down a formal classification for the area, which had left it vulnerable to speculative development. She said: “Maidstone council needs to have vi-
sion; it cannot just become one vast, urban sprawl. The council has to protect its rural area.”
Drink-drive ban MICHAEL Ashton (77), of Nursery Avenue, Bearsted, has been disqualified from driving for 18 months and fined £700 for drink driving. He pleaded not guilty at Med-
way Magistrates’ Court, fol- lowing an incident in Fauchons Lane, Bearsted, on October 10, 2011. Ashton was driving a Peu-
geot 206, and, when stopped, gave a blood test of 187 mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood. The legal limit is 80 mg. He was ordered to pay £200
costs and a £15 victim sur- charge. The ban can be reduced by
135 days if he completes a re- habilitation course.
10 East
rently crosses the site from Old Mill Farm in its south western corner to roughly the centre of the northern site boundary, where it descends to the A20 verge. “Options are currently being considered, including di- verting it through the structural landscap- ing zone around the site perimeter,” said the statement. Some borough councillors have raised concern about the proposal’s impact on ex- isting water courses and drainage, but the statement claimed: “The disposal of surface water will be kept within the site and will mimic very closely the present situation. The water course will be protected from any additional surface run off with the use of cut off drains and bunds. The inclusion of petrol interceptors in the drainage systems will protect the ground and the local water courses from any pollution.” Aplanning applicationwas due to be sub- mitted to Maidstone Borough Council in due course. It is anticipated that it will be in hybrid form, with the access, structural landscaping and some buildings shown in detail – to address the requirements of iden- tified occupier(s) – with the remaining plots applied for in outline, with details of ap- pearance, landscaping, layout and scale re- served for future determination. The public has until February 11 to sub- mit its views on the submitted proposal.
Opponents prepare to fight scheme Cllr Whittle (pictured) said the area simply did
not have the infrastructure to copewith increased traffic levels. She said: “There is no sign of a Leeds-Langley bypass on the horizon. Central governmentwill not give us the funding and KCC does not have it. The roads cannot cope with the additional traffic this would bring. “There is also the fear that it would draw jobs away from
ParkWood. This development could damage our tourist economy and lead to job losses in other parts of the town. “ Cllr Mike Bedwell, chairman of Hollingbourne Parish Council, said he feared any development would have an adverse impact on the Mercure Hotel, Leeds Castle and Lenham Storage. He said: “There will be no net benefit to Maidstone if new business comes in at the expense of similar, es- tablished business, such as Lenham Storage. These three businesses employ a lot of people and need to be protected.”
Continued from page one
for the children of Thurnham. MrWale said 11 of the 90 pupils who started at Thurnham in September 2012 were from the Thurnham parish. Cllr Peter Waite said people living in rural Thurnham, such as Caring Lane, were being “totally ig- nored” as Thurnham was their closest school but they were not included in the priority area. Chairman Cllr Daniel Skinner
said Cllr John Horne had re- searched the school and discov- ered that the diocese funded the building at its original site, in Thurnham parish, on the under- standing it was used to educate Thurnham children. Councillors questioned whether the school
would have to re-pay themoney if they no longer prioritised chil- dren from the village. County Cllr Jenny Whittle
said when St John’s C of E Pri- mary School in nearby Proven- der Way, Grove Green, doubles its intake from September 2013 it would “mop up” the children who might have been left with- out a place at a local school. She said the admissions policy had caused a rift between parents who had managed to get their children into local schools and those who hadn’t. Ninety children will be ad- mitted to Thurnham Infant School’s reception year and a “linked” policy will mean chil- dren leaving Thurnham will be
Historic site THEsiteiswellknown for its archaeological value. A Roman coin hoard was
found on the site in the 1950s and, as a result, it is identi- fied as having a good poten- tial for further Roman evidence. A post-medieval sand pit
and mine was located imme- diately to the north-west of the site. If mine workings ex- tended into the site these would require investigation prior to any development. The supporting statement
said: “While the site might contain a small number of prehistoric flints or medieval stray finds, it is believed to have a generally low poten- tial for significant evidence from the prehistoric, Saxon and medieval periods.”
Anger over school’s admissions policy
offered a place at Roseacre. Some prospective parents are
not happy with the proposals. One man, who was about to be- come a father, said: “My wife went to Thurnham school and we may not be able to send our children to this school.” He asked if Thurnham school could be expanded, but was told the site is not big enough. The parish council intended
to object to the proposed prior- ity area on the grounds of inad- equate consultation, unfairness and a lack of logic when decid- ing on the area. The consultation ended on February 1 but both the parish council and CllrWhittle believe it needs to be repeated.
Support YOUR local paper — and we can support YOU - advertise on 01622 630330
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48