downsmail.co.uk


‘Garden village victory doesn’t mean it’s over’


THE threat of a 2,000 home “garden village” in Marden has been avoided, but campaigners are meeting the latest twist with caution.


Marden, to be developed by Countryside Properties, was one of four sites for huge housing schemes as Maidstone Borough Council reviews its Local Plan. A consultation takes place next month and campaigner Claudine Russell told supporters not to rip up their protest posters just yet. Mrs Russell, pictured with hus- band Tristan, added: “I don’t suppose this will be last we have heard from these developers. We have to be realistic – no village will get nothing. “It all comes back to the num- bers, because they are just mas- sive. It’s a pity the council cannot do more to challenge the num- bers. It’s a shame, but as a resi- dent, I feel like sometimes you have to say enough is enough.” Among the many issues raised by the Marden Planning Opposi- tion Group were infrastructure, flooding and the sheer scale of the Countryside scheme, which would split the village in two. The critically endangered turtle dove’s habitat would be de- stroyed, said the group. Mrs Russell warned locals should anticipate a “hostile” ap-


Parking and


road space THE council plans to refresh its town centre parking strategy with disincentives for long-term park- ing while prioritising for shoppers and visitors. Resident parking zones will also be reviewed “to ensure they are fair, simple and meet needs of all road users”. The council says provision of ad- equate, well-located and responsi- bly priced parking is essential. It must support the retail economy to facilitate access where alternative travel modes are limited and mo- bility-impaired persons are able to access key education, employment and leisure facilities.


It also looks at the demand for limited road space and says it is cru- cial to avoid over-provision of park- ing. The council plans to continue to review park-and-ride services.


Planning | News


Expansion scheme to


update Mall MAIDSTONE’S main indoor shopping centre, The Mall, is set for widescale improvement and expansion with active support from Maidstone Borough Coun- cil. This aim is set for inclusion in the revised Local Plan.


plication from Countryside. This happens when a defeated devel- oper comes back with another similar application for considera- tion. At the MBC’s committee meeting on November 9 she de- clared “we are a village united”. But DHA planning consultant


Chris Hawkins, representing the developer, argued the Marden application was more appropriate to the needs of the Local Plan re- view than the council’s own 4,000 home plan at Lenham Heath.


By accelerating the review, MBC “could cause greater risk” and expressed surprise Lenham had progressed given the ques- tion marks hanging over it, he said. Vice chairman of Marden


Parish Council Kate Tippen said Marden would have been turned into a commuter satellite commu- nity with “very limited” local job opportunities. She added: “It must be the right development in the right place.”


The council says the current building is becoming dated with its layout and internal environ- ment, and is less suited to mod- ern retailers’ requirements compared with both Fremlin Walk (Maidstone) and competing centres like Tunbridge Wells, Canterbury, Ashford and Blue- water. The council proposes to expand The Mall to a wider area and is looking at the multi-storey car park fronting Romney Place and Sainsbury’s, as well as land to the north of King Street including the council car park and former AMF Bowling building. The council says: “A compre-


hensive scheme could deliver net additional shopping floor space and help meet the retail growth predicted for later in the plan pe- riod. Redevelopment will help sustain and enhance the commer- cial health of the town centre.” The Local Plan needs to define


the primary shopping area where new retail development must be first directed before edge of cen- tre sites within 300m of the pri- mary area.


Lenham ‘complicated, risky’


Continued from page 1 by independent consultants warning Lenham Heath is a com- plicated proposal and very risky, the council has chosen to ignore its own commissioned expert ad- vice and opted to include the scheme in the Local Plan re- view.”


The public consultation runs from December 1 until Decem- ber 22. Conservative Cllr Patrik Garten accused the ruling parties at MBC of producing a “stinking fudge”.


Blaming the Liberal Demo- crat/Labour ‘alliance’, who run the local authority, for not going straight to regulation 19, which he feels would have bought MBC more time when sweeping planning reforms by Govern-


ment could increase Maidstone’s burden by 80%. He said: “Resi- dents are angry at us that all our good intentions will only pro- vide a bodged Local Plan, which may be worse than having none at all. “I always hear that a Local Plan protects us from a developer’s charter. A local plan which forces us to provide unsustainable housing targets is a developer’s charter. Let the people of Maid- stone come back to us; let the people


of Maidstone judge


whether this is a fudge; let the people of Maidstone tell us whether they actually feel safe with this Local Plan.” Bearsted


councillor Val


Springett warned “fairness is im- portant but consistency is essen-


tial” in considering schemes. Cllr Denis Spooner said the last thing residents should want is for the LPR to fail, otherwise it would become a building free- for-all. Cllr Clive English said the re- port gave social and affordable housing only “tepid acknowl- edgement”, a sentiment echoed by Cllr Malcolm McKay. Committee


chairman Cllr


David Burton said: “The draft document was acknowledged to be a starting point and the con- sultation is the mechanism for changes and improvements to be considered.”


The document was passed unanimously by all parties.


Comment, page 47 13


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