downsmail.co.uk 


increase in council tax fromApril but if our quality of life is not to diminish further, it has to happen. Our local councils (Maidstone,


Tax bullet wemust all bite MailMarks


VERY fewwillwelcome a heftier


Tonbridge &Malling and Kent County plus Kent PoliceAuthority) have been severely restricted by government since 2012 on increases and they have cut back services and expenditure to the bone (and beyond). In addition, they have been starved of


much traditional government funding and expected tomeetmore costs, especially on social care. When theywere limited to only 2%


increases in 2012, councils trimmed off mostly the fatwe hardlymissed. But over the next five years the restrictionswere almost as severe and very significant cuts have beenmade in vital services. Nowcouncilswill be able to raise our


bills by up to 6%but as 2%is ring-fenced to help governmentmeet costs of seriously underfunded local social care, andwith inflation running around 3%, do not expect to see a big improvement in local services. The Local Government Association saysmany councils are at breaking point and the planned increase is nowhere near enough. The UK is reputed to be among the


wealthiest countries in theworld – yet increasingly I get a third-world feeling aboutmany local services, such as quality of our roads, uncleared li�er, hedgerows runningwild, lack of sensible school


EUcheeky to demandmore


READING your newspaper, Iwas dismayed to read that themeeting betweenMaidstoine Borough Council and Kent County Council over the relief road has nowbeen delayed formonths. Dismayed but not surprised! Judging by


the apparent unwillingness to engage in any kind ofmeangful dialogue since November 2 goes to prove they have absolutely no intention of sorting out their issues beforemoving forward. They are more concernedwith pe�y point scoring than representing the peoplewho have voted themin. Therewas precious li�le to celebrate


after the publicmeeting on November 2 except theMPs banging the council leaders’ heads together. Noweven that glimmer of hope fades as


the politicians decide that party politics comes, once again, before the people! SMillar, email


No choice overWoodcut IN LIGHT of the controversial nature of


theWoodcut Farmapplication, I thought it worthwhile placing into contextmy decision to frame andmove themotion which sawapproval granted for outline planning permission for up to 45,295m2


of 33 Malling February 2018


DENNISFOWLE President dfowle2011@aol.com


places, diminishing library services, reducing rural bus services, lack of council staff, shortage of police.Add to these, deteriorating national services on the likes of the NHS, the nation’s infrastructure, and support for those in greatest need. It is not a happy picture. Those in Band F propertieswill see


council tax bills rise fromaround £2,300 to about £2,450 and Band G fromabout £2,650 to around £2,820. The increases are rightly less for smaller properties. Formany, the increasewill be painful –


but it is a local tax bulletwe nowhave to bite.





Woodcut Farm NOW it has been carefully


considered and accepted by a government inspector as a significant feature ofMaidstone Local Plan, I see no prospect of success for on-going protestors against the business park now scheduled forWoodcut Farmat J8 of the M20. It has themassive advantage of the


easiest-possible access to our key motorway for lorries and cars and this


commercial development on farmland between theA20 andM20, close to J8. A planning commi�eemust determine


all applications in conformitywith the development plan. To stray fromthis quasi-judicial straight-jacket and refuse a policy compliant application invites an expensive planning appeal, an overturn of its decision and hefty costs award. For a big application likeWoodcut Farm,


such an award of costswould totalmany hundreds of thousands of pounds, resulting in further cuts to council services. The planning commi�ee cannotmake or


amend the policies bywhich it is bound. It wasMaidstone council’s strategic planning commi�ee (and the full council) which democratically agreed the Local Plan, including its allocation of 49,000m2


commercial floor space atWoodcut Farm. All responsiblemembers of our


planning commi�ee understood that they had no choice but to permit this application. Despitemy ownmisgivings over


development atWoodcut Farm(and having never personally voted for the Local Plan), I understood that this allocation enjoyedmajority support at Maidstone Borough Council, and therefore sought to play a constructive role. This included negotiating design parameter


should keepmost of themoff our overcrowded local roads. It is the type of location businesses demand and I believe itwill quickly prove an economic boom to our town. What I do not buy is that itwill be an


unseemly distraction for our lovely Leeds Castle. They are far enough removed. I also disregard suggestions this should


be linkedwith the huge and successful KIG ba�les. KIGwas a rail/warehouses monstrosity proposed from Hollingbourne through Thurnhamto the centre of Bearsted. Some fear the newbusiness park is just


the first step in KIG No. 2. I see no evidence of this andwelcomeMaidstone Council statements that land between Woodcut Farmand Bearstedwill be safeguarded. The business parkwill require quality


design and good landscaping to ensure that its prominent position viewing from theA20 is not unduly harmful in this se�ing close to anArea of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). I amstill not convinced, however, that


Maidstone Borough Council chose the right site for this park. I preferred the Gallagher proposal on


the opposite side of theA20,with its natural visual shielding. Itwould have also been the starting point for the Leeds/Langley bypass running to Five Wents, Langley,with a good chunk of funding to support the newroad.


enhancements and a binding legal agreementwhich ensures that the applicantmust providemore than 22 acres of newwoodland nature reserve (in perpetuity), thus conferring big gains for wildlife and landscape and, crucially, providing a buffer against any future westward expansion. Cllr Tony Harwood, Liberal Democrat member,Maidstone Borough Council


Urban sprawl admission of


THE admission of responsibility for our ferociously pro-development Local Plan by the Conservative planning commi�ee member, CllrMa� Boughton, in Downs Mail is awelcome intervention. His surprisingly open admission shines a light onwhere true blame lies for this depressing blueprint for urban sprawl and gridlock. Conservatives ranMaidstone council


between 2008 and 2014when the ‘call for sites’ exercisewas undertaken,which spawned a raft of controversial developments, such as those in Su�on Road and Hermitage Lane, and sawlocal landscape protection deleted or diluted. By the time the Conservatives lost


control, largely as a result of public anger at their development choices, the process


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