downsmail.co.uk
Mote Park – best in Britain? MailMarks
WE should be very proud Mote Park is
now regularly voted among the best three parks in the country – and it could rise to the top.
Improvements to pathways, parking and
views over the last two years have seen visi- tors numbers swell. Now Maidstone Council has announced plans for the next big steps – a major, larger, re-built restaurant with mag- nificent vistas down to the scenic lake, up- graded toilets and a charged adventure and activity feature next to the free children’s play area towards the leisure centre. We often take our grandchildren for an
hour or so. These new attractions will make most stays a lot longer – perhaps for three hours if the restaurant and eating experiences hit the right buttons. I would like to see the magnificent scenery and fascinating history of the park imaginatively displayed around the restaurant to excite visitors and encourage wider exploration of the 440-acre park. How many know the enthralling story of
former park owner Lord Bearsted, founder of Shell oil company? He named it after his fam- ily business which traded worldwide in orna- mental sea shells. He was an amazing man who died in 1927. His heirs sold Mote Park to Maidstone Corporation for £50,000 in 1929 and The MoteCricket Groundwas left in trust
Highways before homes
Dear Sir – Here is a quote from a KCC internal report to Mathew Balfour, cabinet member. “The housing target can only be reached once proper planning policy constraints are applied to the need figure, ie
environmental, infrastructure etc.” As can be seen,
Cllr John Wilson
the “need” figure, which is 18,560 houses, is accepted as it has been by most partners, but that it can be
reduced if the necessary infrastructure cannot be provided, ie highways, schools etc.
What has not been highlighted by anyone in the current local plan debate is that Maidstone Borough Council is not responsible for providing this infrastructure, and therefore cannot reduce the housing target without input from Kent County Council. We have been asking for andwaiting for
this input for many months and allwe get from KCC leader Paul Carter is rhetoric and the promise of a public meeting in February. The time has now come for KCC to put
Contact our team ...
Stephen Eighteen Editor
stephen@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 231
32 Maidstone South February 2016 Diane Nicholls
Assistant editor
diane@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 232
Jane Shotliff
Journalist
jane@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 233
Dawn Kingsford
Journalist
dawn@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 233
DENNISFOWLE President
dfowle2011@aol.com
to the cricket club. With the park attracting a million visitors a
year – and this will grow – parking problems will increase, despite the new £1-a-day charge. I believe one of the next areas for council consideration should be the large grassed area lined with lovely trees between the entrance and exit roads. In winter it is often a quagmire. I think its main value will be as a surfaced
car park – but recommend greater ambition. I think the end closest to the park entrance would be a very popular location for two or three quality restaurants. I think dining in the park would be a very exciting addition. This area could be a good earner, too, for our cash- strapped council. I would also like the council to upgrade the
sports take in the park. There is a little-used area close to the leisure centre and bowls club large enough for high-quality football, rugby etc pitches. At the moment, much of this land undulates all over the place but an investment
its money where its mouth is and to respond to the latest Reg 19 local plan report so that those sites with severe infrastructure constraints can be removed from the list, therefore reducing the housing target. It is no good Mr Carter assuring the
parish councils that KCC will in future object to planning applications on highways grounds – that will be too late. If Maidstone grinds to a halt in the future because of serious traffic problems, it will be due to KCC not standing up and doing its duty, as an infrastructure provider – it holds the power to reduce numbers, not Maidstone Borough Council! Cllr JohnAWilson, Maidstone Council, Coxheath and Hunton ward
Wrong on park and ride
Dear Sir – The Mail Mark on the very worrying future for traffic flows in and around Maidstone makes me question Maidstone Council's decision to collapse to local pressure and drop completely the Linton park-and-ride proposal. Itwas in the wrong position and should
be placed at the foot of Linton Hill on the approaches to Marden. Perhaps some businesses could benefit – certainly the local pub but does it not make sense to offer an element of services such as car cleaning, servicing, MOTs etc? This could also reduce traffic needing to enter the town centre. The council must be
in levelling andwell-planned layoutwould be very welcome by our sporting community. There is a strong demand from various sports – and the council knows it under-provides for sport in the borough. It should be protected for quality sport use
– but routes left for walkers and dogs to ac- cess other more popular areas of the park. Those I questioned have little appetite for walking over the current sports pitches. Changing rooms and showers are available
in the leisure centre – but sports clubs would like to see these upgraded. I know some will see my thoughts as harmful to their image of parts of the park. But no one should now doubt the popularity of recent changes – it has become a park of even greater beauty and fun. Let’s keep that ball rolling. What do you think? The Downs Mailwel- comes reader letters on Mote Park.
Fax frustrations Some 20 years ago a business abused my
fax machine by sending unsolicited adverts. Ten years ago I removed the machine – but still these unwanted nuisance phone calls ar- rive almost daily, causing great inconven- ience. Any advice please?
positive in tackling our serious traffic problems – and I see just negativity. Richard Maryan, by email
Quashing NHS myths
Dear Sir – Dennis Fowle repeats some old myths about the NHS that need squashing. Recycled regularly, especially by those
whowant to convince us that we can no longer afford an NHS andwe should be thinking of charges, an insurance system or privatisation, they include: Charging would help: No it wouldn’t.
It just shifts the costs to the poor and the elderly who are less healthy than other groups. The Germans gave this up after the failure of a six-year experiment. The evidence is that it encourages the “worrieswell” but deters the poor sick, which costs more in the long
Dr Paul Hobday
run. The US Commonwealth Fund rates the UK NHS as the most cost-effective healthcare system in the world. Ageing population: Exaggerated. Most money is spent in the last six months of life, irrespective of how old you are. Costs too much: Wrong.We spend less on health than the other G7 nations and in
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