downsmail.co.uk Housing target myths


Dear Sir – Councillor Val Springe (September edition) quotes past omissions and mistakes of previous planners as justification for repeating the urban sprawl of Maidstone from Bearsted to Harrietsham and on to Lenham. Maidstone Council is being led by its unelected officials and is ignoring the duty of individual members to instruct the officers on housing targets. The council repeats the myth that central Government is dictating numbers, despite a clear leer from communities secretary Eric Pickles, and leers and a video from Sir Hugh Robertson stating this is not the case. These leers are published in full at www.savelenham.org. Maidstone Council has ignored the comments of KCC about its original draft plan, which argues that “the housing target should be lowered to a figure of approximately 14,500. Taking into consideration already approved/completed sites, and an appropriate allowance for windfall sites, a revised target for new sites would be a more realistic 8,640.” The document adds: “As urban selements have grown larger, ‘edge of urban area’ extensions such as those proposed in north west and south east Maidstone are now located a significant distance from the town centre. KCC’s view is that this approach is unsust`ainable in infrastructure and planning terms.” Also, it has become apparent to KCC that Maidstone Council has not listened to the parish councils concerning the development of housing allocations in the draft local plan. Parish and town councils, aswell as residents’ groups and other similar organisations, can play a key role in developing the local plan. These groups are often best placed to know the issues relating to their area/village/selements. Readers are urged to make up their own


minds on the evidence and not perpetuate myths. Mike Cocke, Save Lenham campaign


Mike, Maidstone Council’s housing target – previously 19,600, now 18,600 – was based on findings from consultant GL Hearn, which was employed by the borough to help produce its local plan. KCC leader Paul Carter disputed this figure


and commissioned a report from Peter Bre Associates to prove him correct. Despite a cost of £15,000, this report was never completed, although former Maidstone Council leader Chris Garland claims to have seen some of its contents, and that they agree with the GL Hearn figure. At the same time, there is a strong view that


the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework has effectively forced local authorities into allocating greenfield land for new housing. This is all worth remembering when politicians and authorities from the outside round on the borough council. If it was so easy to prevent housing on greenfield land, then perhaps Sir Hugh Robertson, who was a senior minister until recently, would like to explain why 27,000 houses on greenfield land have been given the go-ahead on appeal by Government-appointed planning inspectors in the past two years. Response by Stephen


Have voters been misled?


Dear Sir – After reading the Sam Roach leer, I consider that he is the one who is misleading the readers of the Downs Mail; in fact, I would go on to say the people of Maidstone. He mentions our MP Helen Grant and


where her family home is, but let’s give the people of Maidstone a few home truths about him.  Mr Roach is not a resident of Maidstone; in fact he lives in Strood, which is in Medway, so does not vote for our MP Helen Grant. Furthermore the address he used at the boom of his leer is the address of the Maidstone and theWeald Liberal Democrat Party where Mr Roach works alongside Jasper Gerard. So I feel his leer is a political one to boost Mr Gerard’s profile  Mr Roach also stood in the borough elections in May 2014 for Fant ward and misled the residents of that area after he put out a leaflet a fewweeks ago thanking residents for their support and claimed he finished seven points behind the winner. Actually, Mr Roach finished last out of the five candidates who stood. Before running down our MP Helen


Grant, he should take a hard look at himself. Cllr Mike Hogg, Conservative councillor for South ward


Mike, Sam came last in this year’s Fant election with 16.59% of the vote. Labour’s Paul Harper was elected with 23.62%. The obvious assumption is that Sam’s leaflet refers to the seven-point percentage gap, though I agree that using the word ‘points’ could be misleading. Response by Stephen


Beer routes for cyclists


Dear Sir – I am writing in response to the report in October’s Downs Mail report on September’s Joint Transportation Board meeting.


Unfortunately, the reportwas not entirely accurate and failed to include an essential part of my contribution to the discussion. Maidstone town centre is frequently crippled by traffic gridlock and suffers from excessive levels of air pollution. As more and more vehicles pass through, geing into the town has become increasingly difficult and unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists. At the meetingwewere presented with a proposal to improve traffic flows through the town centre by eliminating the existing bridge gyratory. This new road scheme may reduce congestion but, as it stands, it does nothing for pedestrians and cyclists. At the meeting Cllr FranWilson and I stressed the need for the scheme to be refined to provide enhanced provision for pedestrians and cyclists to get into the town from the west. The subways are awkward to maintain, flood-prone and difficult to clear afterwards. They are not pleasant to use although I ampleased some refurbishment has recently been undertaken. Nonetheless many people, especially those with wheelchairs and buggies, find it easier or prefer to cross the roads at street level. In my view, the subways are not fit for purpose;we need to find beerways for pedestrians to get into the town centre.


There is a dedicated eastbound cycleway


on St Peter’s Bridge; this should be retained. However, there is no such provision for cyclists travellingwestwards. At the meeting I noted that there are wide footpaths on both sides of the Broadway bridge. The southern side of the bridge is the main thoroughfare for pedestrians, but the northern side is hardly used and doesn't need such a wide footpath. If this footway was reduced and the roadways realigned it might be possible to create the space for a dedicatedwestbound cycle lane on the southern side of Broadway. Ifwe can find the means to improve the provision for pedestrians and cyclists, then perhapswe really can reunite our “divided” town. Rob Bird, KCC member for Maidstone Central


Trailer not the problem


Dear Sir –As the owner of the trailer mentioned in your October issue, I feel I have to address untruths mentioned in this article. I have had no complaints from the police


or the authorities concerning the obstruction of vehicles turning right into Old Tovil Road. The position is monitored on CCTV and I have never seen any vehicle having problems turning the corner because of my trailer. The trailer is chained in this position because inconsiderate residents used to park there, right up to the junction. Living on the corner Iwas frequently asked by lorry drivers who the cars belonged to, as they were preventing them from turning. These selfish acts also blocked access to my property. I have had no such problems since chaining my trailer to the drain. You incorrectly say residents moved my


trailer to help a vehicle turn the corner. The truth is they moved it to park in the space. There is no widespread opposition to my


trailer. In fact, it means traffic flows more easily around the corner. What a pity you did not try to contact me


to find out why I took this action. Your article is a fine example of the guer press standards, misinformation and distortion that we regularly read in our papers. DavidWas, Muir Road, Maidstone


David, we tried to make contact with the owner of the trailer, but we could find no information to suggest that you were that person. We always endeavour to give all sides to our stories and by printing this leer I hope you feel you have had your say. Response by Stephen


Lucky to have buses at all


Dear Sir – In reply to the article concerning the Tovil buses, I find them and their drivers quite adequate. The drivers in particular are jolly, polite and helpful as well as careful. When Nu-Venture took over the Marden/Yalding routes itwas rumoured that Arriva didn’twant this route as it ran at a loss.Well, I amglad Nu-Venture took it over aswe are lucky to have a bus service at all. Maybe the buses aren’t perfect, but the


staff are. Don’t mock what you have in case you lose it. Pauline Durant, Flood Hatch, Maidstone


Maidstone Town November 2014 35


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  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64