LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


Notcutts forecast inaccurate THE story in the Maidstone October edition of Downs Mail needs to be read and under- stood in the cold light of day and appreciate the real facts and not necessarily those as spouted by the developers. At an exhibition arranged by the develop-


ers and tenants of the proposed development at Notcutts, some of the information pro- vided was, to say the least, disingenuous. The “map and diagram” of the proposed development gives the impression of a stand-alone rural development. There is no indication of the othermassive on-going and proposed next door developments, i.e.KIMS and Maidstone Medical Centre, both of which will massively increase the traffic flow and congestion formost of the day. The latterwants car parking spaces for 1,200 ve- hicles as part of the development,while Not- cutts is proposing 900 such spaces. The roads in that area cannot currently cope dur- ing rush hour. The proposals include adding traffic lights


and pedestrian crossings at various points in the locality which will impact not only on the local roads but add even longer queues to traffic trying to leave the M20 at J7, where queues already build up during the evening rush hour. All of this is without the already agreed development of over 140 dwellings on land


Backing protest over store Dear Sir – I am writing about the Loose Am- bulance station planning application. Residents of North Loose are now aware


that this planning application for the Loose Ambulance Station for a Sainsbury’s store and dwellingwas placed in front of the plan- ning committee. As the Conservative councillor for South


ward, I supported the North Loose Residents Association, the residents and local busi- nesses in Boughton Parade, to try and stop this application from being passed, for this will create further traffic problems in an area which is already suffering. However, the planning committee granted permission. It was disappointing to note that our other two ward councillors – Ian Chit- tenden and Derek Mortimer – could not show the same support or commitment to the resi- dents and local businesses of North Loose against this planning application. However, they sent instead the leader of the LiberalDe- mocrats group to stand in for one of them, who also voted for this application to be passed. Many of the residents in North Loose over


the last few weeks have said to me that Lib- eral Democrats often tell us they are against development in our area and claim theywill fight for us: but, when it comes down to de- cisions that have to be made on the council, they seem to do a different thing! As I stated at the planning meeting, while I


am elected as your Conservative councillor I will fight for the residents of North Loose and Tovil against development that will cause harm to our local community. Cllr Mike Hogg, by email


We don’t want supermarket Dear Sir – I thought Iwould write after hear- ing that the Loose Road will get a Sainsbury’s Local supermarket. This follows a lengthy battle, including the hard work of the North Loose Residents’ Association. Most residents did not want this supermar-


ket, but we were not listened to. Maidstone planning officer Kate Altieri was adamant


You can write to us at: Downs Mail, 2 Forge House, Bearsted Green Business Park, Bearsted, Maidstone, ME14 4DT or e-mail: info@downsmail.co.uk


within the TV studios grounds. Jason Lewis is quoted in the article as saying:“We expect to not only keep traffic flows as they are, but to improve them”. You really do have to wonder about the logic being used to sup- port such a statement. As for Land Securities development direc-


tor Chris Ward's comments that the devel- opment would “complement, rather than compete with” Maidstone town centre, you need to read that comment in conjunction with the story in the same edition of Downs


“The proposals also include dualling the road between the KIMS and Bearsted Road round- abouts. Where will this extra land come from? The protected nature reserve or the cremato- riumgrounds as theopposite side of the road is a steep bank?”


Mail that an £8m refurbishment of The Mall Shopping Centre in the town has been post- poned as a result of Next's successful plan- ning application to build a superstore on the site next to but west of the A249/Bearsted Road roundabout adjacent to Notcutts. Ward adds that improved bus and park


and ride facilities will enable shoppers to stay in Maidstone to spend more money after shopping atNotcutts. When did he last go shopping for food etc. on a bus? If some- one goes to the shopping village they are not then going to get on a bus into the town and


that this should be approved for planning. Does she live in the area? No. Does she care what we wanted? No, but I’ve got a funny feeling the bigwigs at Sainsbury’s cared what she wanted. So we can now look forward to Lucky Newsagent, The Spar and Plonkers off-li- cence struggling for business, with the possi- bility of closure, and the Boughton Parade shops being boarded up. If our planning department has its way,


every piece of land will be developed. Mark Burgess, Loose


I welcome shopping village Dear Sir – I amsick of the whining town cen- tre vested interests complaining about the J7 retail development. I live in Bearsted and I welcome it. The town centre is a disgrace – costly and inadequate parking, jobsworths fining you for staying a minute too long or stalk-


ing you in case you drop a crumb, pound and charity shops everywhere, old-fashioned opening hours still rife, grotty pubs and clubs leaving stinking rubbish around, a useless riverfront blocked off by a dual carriageway and, insultingly, councillors talking as if we are lucky to be allowed to visit. Well get this. I don't have to go there, I go


where they try to please me - Bluewater and the new J7 development, places where PC anti-car councillors can't play their childish games, where I'mwelcome. More of these please and shut up town cen-


tre, learnwhat being customer friendly really means or become another Gravesend. Frankly, it’swhat you deserve. StephenWilliams,Ware Street, Bearsted


No vote without computer Dear Sir – In the East edition of the Downs Mail, you carried a story inviting us to vote for our favourite park. How are people with- out access to a computer supposed to vote, given that the only option given is via the website? Whilst there are obviously computers in li- braries etc, many people still have no idea how to use the internet. I am sure there are


carry shopping with them while they shop for more and then get the bus back towhere they have parked at the shopping village. Most people once they have bought their shopping just want to take it home. There is nothing in the development about


noise levels and howthese will be abated for those of us living oppositeWeaveringHeath. Then there is the light pollution, especially during the autumn, winter and early spring months. By sending all the traffic to the en- larged New Cut roundabout the noise levels will increase tremendously and last for many more hours of the day so much so that we will not be able to sit in our garden dur- ing the summermonths. Speaking to one of the developer's representatives at the above exhibition he said there was nothing in the plans to alleviate the noise levels. When it comes to the formal planning ap- plication Iwill of course be objecting, citing the above as some of the reasons for refusing planning application. Despite Eric Pickles' localism legislation, I confidently expect MBC to totally ignore any objections. When are the next local elections? The


local MPs were very vociferous when in op- position to the proposedM20 J8 KIG devel- opment and successfully prevented it once they came to power.Will they act in a simi- lar vein when this application hits MBC's desk? I amnot holding my breath. Ian Stuart, Coppice View,Weavering


many elderly people who use the parks regu- larly who must have felt disenfranchised by this article.


MGaherty, Bearsted


Homes not in Mote Park Dear Sir – Please let me assure Andy Hol- brook (Letters, October) that the proposed residential development is not in Mote Park but on four acres owned privately by trustees of the Mote Cricket Club site. This development has been discussed with Maidstone Council over many years and the key layout of our proposal was strongly en- couraged at a meeting we had with Tory, Lib- Dem and Independent group leaders. This also included supportive LibDem councillors for High Street ward and Tories for Shepway North. Our club is grateful for a £15,000 grant from the council to help us with the substan- tial costs of preparing a planning application. We worked closelywith the council to sub-


mit a satisfactory application suited to our magnificent ground and respectful of neigh- bours and enhancing the environment of Mote Park, just improved so sensitively. It is seen as an enabling development and commits us to finance a major improvement to the site facilities. Kent County CricketClub walked away in 2005 because these have be- come faded and outdated for modern sport- ing needs. They would like to see the Maidstone festival return. Now we have a bid of about £4m for these


four acres to enable us to build an excellent new pavilion and other significant improve- ments to secure a centre of sporting excel- lence for generations to come. We see many benefits for the local commu-


nity and will shortly consult neighbouring residents whose friendship we respect and cherish. We think Maidstone will once again be


very proud of a popular and magnificent sports ground and community facilities. Our volunteers work hard to achieve this and we are grateful for so much local help and sup- port.


Glen Aukett, chairman, The Mote Cricket Club.


Support YOUR local paper — and we can support YOU - advertise on 01622 630330 Town 43


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  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56