News | Local plan
downsmail.co.uk Leader’s homes inquiry threat
KCC leader Paul Carter has warned that he could object at a public inquiry over the borough council’s housing target for Maidstone.
Cllr Carter, who lives in Langley
and represents Maidstone Rural North, says he is opposed to Maid- stone Council’s accepted target of 19,600 new homes to meet Govern- ment targets. In February, he told Downs Mail
he had authorised an investigation into the methodology behind this figure, which was reached by plan- ning consultant GL Hearn. He hoped to use the findings of the probe to convince the council to go for a much lower figure. There is speculation throughout
the borough council that this report showed the methodology used by GLHearnwas correct.However, de- spite repeated requests for a com- ment from Cllr Carter and KCC, no confirmation had been received as wewent to press. Nevertheless, KCC could still for- mally object to the borough’s draft
local plan, which could mean a costly and time-consuming public inquiry.
Questioned by Lib Dem Cllr Rob
Bird at a recent meeting of KCC’s full council, Cllr Carter said “De- tailed consideration must be given to the extent of growth that the Maidstone area can sensibly accom- modate. “Everybody accepts there is a na-
tional housing shortage and we must allocate further space for eco- nomic growth. However, common sense must be applied in arriving at sensible housing numbers.” Cllr Carter would prefer to see a
plan providing 14,500-15,000 homes and he said: “Tomy mind, the bor- ough council should reduce the quantum of housing proposed in their local plan…and choose loca- tions with appropriate existing in- frastructure to support growth, such
County town ‘such a great place to live’
MAIDSTONE’S need for new housing stems from it being such a popular place to live. That is according to borough councillor Richard Ash, member for Bearsted, who says while prop- erty in Kent might be expensive, it is still better than places like Berk- shire, Buckinghamshire and Sur- rey.
Discussing the need for 19,600
new homes by 2031, he told mem- bers of the parish council: “It’s still relatively cheap to live here, compared to places like London and other nearby counties. “I would not want to be young nowadays, when there is such a great gap between income and house prices. The average wage is £30,000, while the average house price is nearer £180,000. People just cannot afford to get onto the housing ladder.” Compared to many areas of the borough, Bearsted would not be greatly affected by the house- building hike, said Cllr Ash – but that was primarily because all the spare land had been built on. The east side of Maidstone had
seen the construction of Downswood, Madginford, Grove Green and Bearsted Park since 1960 and few areas of open land remained. He added: “The growth has
been dramatic – but is Bearsted any the worse for it? It is still a lovely place to live.” Members conceded that another
36 Maidstone Town May 2014 Mote Park, the ‘jewel’ of Maidstone
19,600 homes were unlikely to be built – as some had already been constructed. The council is also making a case that the traffic, schools and general infrastructure cannot support such a high level of growth. But Cllr Denis Spooner (pic-
tured) pointed out: “Those who are objecting have not thought this through. The reason there is a shortage is because we have not been building enough houses in the past 30 years, and the shortage has driven house prices up. We need to think to the future. Where will our children and grandchil- dren live?” Cllr Pat Marshall, the first resi-
dent of Madginford, said: “I re- member looking out at strawberry fields and pear orchards, but there was no school and no community hall. I sweated blood and tears to get Madginford Hall. Now, all de- velopments like this have to have a hall.”
But he warned: “If the housing
targets are unrealistic and cannot be supported in infrastructure terms, Kent County Council may have no opportunity but to object to the local plan and launch a significant chal- lenge at a public inquiry.” Maidstone Lib Dems have wel-
comed his stance and are calling on Maidstone’s Conservative adminis- tration to work with KCC without delay to get the proposed housing numbersdownto more realistic and sustainable levels. Cllr Bird said: “None of us want
as localities with good rail and road links and sufficient school accom- modation.” He added: “For the sake of exist-
ing Kent residents, we should pre- serve the character of urban communities and villages, allowing residents to have a sense of pride.”
to see the county council challeng- ing Maidstone Borough Council at a long and expensive public inquiry, but sadly there is a very real prospect of this. “It is clear the current borough council proposals are unsustainable and unrealistic. This borough could be blighted forever.”
Call to cut target ‘is just crazy rubbish’
ALIB DEM claim that the housing need for Maidstone up to 2031 should be almost halved to 10,950 (Downs Mail, April) has been dis- missed by the Maidstone Council cabinet as “crazy rubbish”. “I wish we could find even a lit-
tle validity in this silly claim,” said Conservative leader Cllr Chris Gar- land. “We would welcome new le- gitimate evidence to Government to reduce housing from the evi- dence-based figure we have re- ceived of 19.600. The Lib Dem claimwas made by
group deputy leader Cllr Tony Harwood. He says the 19,600 figure is incorrectly based on a “blip” re- lating to local population statistics in the period 2001/11. In this period the population soared from 137,000 to 153,000 because of Maidstone’s success in regenerating previously developed land. Cllr Harwood says this spike is
used to justify high growth in the next two decades and calls on Maidstone to match growth projec- tions elsewhere in Kent. He told Downs Mail: “This was clearly a blip and must not set a precedent for the future. Our greenfield sites and villages are not up for grabs in theway that derelict urbans siteswere.” The Conservatives investigated
his claim with their advisers and now say the Lib Dems “have mis- understood how the assessment has been assembled”. Cllr Garland told the Downs
Mail: “Past delivery rates cannot be used to determine or undermine the objectively assessed housing need, which is a forward-looking calculation based on demograph- ics.
“In fact the home building on brownfield town centre sites in the recent pastwas mainly apartments, now likely to have growing fami- lies in need of family housing.” The council says it has followed national guidelines and with the help of a specialist consultant GL Hearn has had to identify the scale of housing to meet “household and population projections, taking ac- count of migration and demo- graphic change”. Cllr Garland added: “With the
Government seeking to boost sig- nificantly the supply of housing, it is hard to see how slashing the housing need below trend levels is either realistic or defendable when we go in to a Government local in- quiry. Across the country, Govern- ment inspectors are telling local authorities to increase provision above trend levels. “Trying to push through a policy proposing a far lower level of hous- ing provision will not be successful and will open the council to local plan delays and an increase in spec- ulative development proposals. This will have exactly the opposite impact to that envisaged by the Lib Dems. “Cllr Harwood’s suggestion can- not be taken seriously.”
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