downsmail.co.uk MailMarks
DENNISFOWLE President email
dfowle2011@aol.com
NIMBYs must take a back seat
It’s an odd battle of Torywords
between the leaders of Maidstone Council and Kent County Council on the number of houses Maidstone must plan. And “dishonest” statements still emerge from somemore extreme Lib Dems. KCC’s Paul Carter sticks adamantly with the long-established South East Plan figure. That was 11,080 for the Government plan period of 2006-26. KCC produced new forecasts in 2012 for the subsequent plan period of 2001-2031 and this interim figure was 14,800. ButMaidstone Council, determined to get a Government-approved local plan in place, has been researching current requirements in a fast-evolving scene. Government determination for many more houses nationwide grows, and local authorities not producing evidence-based projections for 2011-2031 are having draft local plans rejected. That gives developers a much freer hand beyond full local controls. Maidstone has commissioned the detailed evidence, which shows a need for 19,600 homes. The evidence is based on a growing population, people living longer, new jobs created and national and international immigration. Maidstone Councilwould like to see this reduced (after identifying current potential) to 17,100. Not all development allocations around the borough will be popular in the communities.We are all NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard), but that argument will be given short shrift, as will the principle of not using green fields, given there are so few brownfield sites remaining. Both Maidstone’s Conservative leader, Cllr Chris Garland, and Lib Dem leader Cllr FranWilson know some greenfield sites will be built on. Their political task now is making the right choices – tough enough without silly electioneering. When shewas given recently a huge vote of confidence as Lib Dem leader, CllrWilson warned a few of her more militant colleagues that campaigning against greenfield usewas dishonest. I amnot sure the message has got through fully to prospective parliamentary candidate Jasper Gerard, who likes to see himself as our omnipresent saviour. She has already warned him “he should understand local people and local politics”.
Getting planning right I agonised with other England cricket
supporters for twoAshes Tests while enjoying Australia – but also trying towork out why their large communities operate better than many of ours. Two features stood out: Many towns are surrounded by well- defined large housing areas linked to the centre by excellent public transport (buses, trams, trains) and good roads. Free regular buses and trams run the length of the town centres and so many use them. Iwas a convert for threeweeks.
30 Maidstone East February 2014 Shopping ‘habits’ unlikely
Dear Sir – Regarding the article on Page 19 of the January edition of Downs Mail, I would like to call into question the comments made by Land Securities spokesman Simon Hoare, specifically to ask what planet he lives on. He said: “Proposals for a bus service would encourage shoppers to make ‘link trips’ into town.” This is one of many reasons for the application to be rejected. Who is going to shop at Newnham Court and then with their shopping traipse into town by bus to do more shopping and then get the bus back to wherever? If he feels that aer shopping at say, Waitrose, shoppers can leave their purchases in their cars and get the link bus into town, do some more shopping and return by bus to their cars, just how does he expect frozen food that may have been purchased to remain frozen? Also, what do the police have to say about this idea, as the sitewould become a haven for thieves? Even if goods are in the boot and out of sight, they will know that some cars may contain expensive clothing etc from Debenhams. The KIMS item on page one calls into question of the seriousness of the developers and, indeed, of all developers at Junction 7 of the M20. Planning permissionwas granted subject to certain conditions and, now the developerwants to renege on some of these, Maidstone Council must stay firm and enforce these conditions because it will be used as a precedent by the developers of the other sites at Junction 7. Ian Stuart, Coppice View,Weavering
Your leer picks up on a couple of interesting points, Ian. Your first one made me laugh. The notion that a great number of people would park up atWaitrose, purchase their food and then board a bus into Maidstone is, indeed, unrealistic. This suggestion is a case of a developer “playing the game” to make planners happy. One would hope that Maidstone Council does not use this as a material consideration in its decision. I would like to think you are being a lile paranoid about the link trips aracting thieves, but perhaps the criminal mind does think in such ways. As for KIMS wanting to renege on the travel conditions imposed by Maidstone Council, which has since accepted the company’s alternative (see page six), you make a good point. Planning conditions are imposed for a reason, but if the council is happy to give them up, you wonder why it bothered imposing them in the first place. One assumes that applicants with less money are treated the same when they aempt to remove those pesky conditions. Response from Stephen
Dear Sir – The Kent Institute of Medicine and Surgery maywell be a huge asset to the area. It is just a pity it has not been beer designed. The development looks like poorly-designed 1960s council flats.A huge opportunity for good design has been missed. Let us hope that the developers of Newnham Court use architects who have a
bit of flair and will produce buildings that will be sympathetic to their situation and a credit to the area. Colin White FRICS, by email
Though the KIMS development has its supporters economically, and will boost private health provision locally, the undoubted by- product is a loss of what was once a very pleasant rural gateway to Maidstone. This urbanisation of Newnham Court will become much greater when the large Maidstone Medical Centre is built and if the proposed retail redevelopment gets the go-ahead. One’s view of architecture is, like music, about taste. Very few 21st century developments have le me feeling aesthetically enthralled and KIMS is no different. Response by Stephen
Store view misinformed
Dear Sir – Regarding the leer last month, I make no apology for who I amor for my love ofmy village, but I feel sorry for the misinformed anonymous contributor who feels they know what is best for Lenham, without any depth of thought about the impact a Co-op storewould have here. He/she has obviously conducted an extensive survey of residents’ views and wishes; otherwise the comment that “we all need our Co-op convenience store in Lenham” is an inaccurate statement. The vast majority of people I have spoken to feel just the opposite, and although I make no claim to have spoken to everyone, I have taken views from a decent cross- section of our population. Part of village life is making trips to town for shopping. If the writer had aended the public meeting with the Co-op in 2012, he/shewould be aware that the Co-op has no intention of altering this, and will (if it gets itsway) aim its store at “top-up shoppers”, just as our current convenience stores do.Aprice comparison in November 2012 showed 20 random items bought at the Lenham Village Storewere marginally cheaper than the same (or as near as possible) 20 items at the Co-op in Madginford. As for my business, I cannot remember the last time I took anyone to a supermarket, certainly not within the last year. The insinuation that I have organised a petition against the Co-op is incorrect. I have signed a petition, but had no part in organising one. Finally, if the writer wishes to spend in excess of £500 on a town crier’s outfit and volunteer their services to Lenham as I have done for the past 22 years, I amsure he/she will gain as much pleasure from the experience as I have. I look forward to meeting him/her in a competition for the post of town crier of Lenham in the future. Gez Clark, Town crier of Lenham.
KIMS a missed opportunity Aack was unwarranted
Dear Sir – Iwas startled to read a personal aack on awell-respected and community- minded member of our village, particularly as the writer’s namewas withheld. The commentswere both groundless and unwarranted. Puing the Co-op issues to one side, I would like to show my support to Gez Clark for his longstanding commitment to the well-being of Lenham. The uniqueness
Comment
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