On Tuesday, October 15, Canterbury City Council approved a highly controversial planning application to extend its Wincheap Park & Ride car park on to a large stretch of floodplain next to the River Stour, an area of land known as Wincheap Water Meadows.
The principle of extending the park & ride is largely uncontentious. Part of the existing footprint of the park & ride will be lost when a new slip road off the A2 is constructed, and there is an accepted need to replace the parking spaces lost and increase capacity for the future.
What is highly contentious is the choice of location for the extension. The council’s chosen location is a large area of functional floodplain outside the city’s urban boundary. The car park will extend for more than 250 metres along the Stour in an Area of High Landscape Value, a designated Green Corridor and a Local Wildlife Site. The council’s planning report pretends there will be no real landscape impact and that views of the car park from the Great Stour Way on the opposite riverbank will only be “glimpsed”. In reality, the landscape impact is likely to be substantial. Views across the river from the Great Stour Way, at present greatly enjoyed by the large number of walkers and cyclists who use it, will be turned into something much less attractive. As the application was made by Canterbury City Council for its own land, many members of the public feel the council had an even greater duty to present the facts of the application in an unbiased and comprehensive manner. As it is, the planning report reads like a report from the applicant itself rather than an impartial assessment.
Development on the water meadows breaches many of the council’s own policies and strategies, including many policies in its Local Plan, its Open Spaces Policy, its Riverside Strategy, its Green Infrastructure Strategy and the Canterbury Conservation Area Appraisal. However, the council argues that local residents had the opportunity to object when it consulted on its Transport Strategy in 2015-2016 and that the principle of development on that location was accepted when the Local Plan was adopted in 2017. The fact that residents simply did not know where the extension was going to be located is conveniently ignored. The Environment Agency objected strongly to the first planning application earlier this year but was informed by the council that it couldn’t maintain its objection as it had not objected when the Local Plan was approved. Kent Wildlife Trust has also submitted a very strong objection, saying: “We regard the compensation strategy proposed for this development as fundamentally flawed and in clear contravention of existing national and local planning policy.” Many of the opponents to the application point out that Canterbury City Council owns most of the large industrial estate adjacent to the park & ride and that it should be building car parks on brownfield land rather than greenfield land. However, the council refuses to consider any other alternative. It claims that its recent Declaration of Climate Emergency means that reducing the carbon emissions from cars takes precedence over the protection of the natural environment – claim many people find totally perverse. The Save Wincheap Water Meadows campaign has attracted a huge amount of public support and the Canterbury branch of CPRE has played a lead role in challenging the application. There are more than 3,100 signatures on a Change.org petition, 775 representations from the public objecting to the planning application (with only one representation in favour) and more than 460 members in the campaign’s Facebook group. There have been many letters and articles in the local paper and large numbers of people attending the council meetings where the park & ride proposal has been discussed. There have also been a number of songs written about the campaign by a local musician, Richard Navarro, including the one below:
You can read thecouncil’s planning application report here
CPRE Kent is calling on all political parties to embrace the countryside charity’s vision for a countryside that is thriving and accessible and makes a significant contribution to reaching net-zero carbon. We want to see sustainable rural communities, supported by investment from business and government, where people’s voices are heard in decision-making and local needs are met.
Our priorities are: 1. Tackling the climate emergency – the next government must commit to ambitious measures to reach net-zero emissions by 2045 through implementing changes to farming practices, the balance of our energy supply and by energy efficiency in homes. 2. A countryside for all of us – our countryside must be a source of well-being for everyone. The next government must improve access to green spaces, especially for children and those who do not have access, as well as helping create a litter-free future with an ‘all-in’ deposit return scheme for cans and bottles. 3. Planning for communities – the planning system is one of local democracy’s most powerful and effective tools. The government must support a well-resourced planning system that empowers communities and promotes development that responds to their needs. Green Belt should be protected and a strict ‘brownfield first’ policy committed to. 4. Creating thriving rural communities – the next government should commit to provide genuinely affordable homes and infrastructure, both digital and actual, such as rural transport that connects communities to employment opportunities and vital public services.
You can read the CPRE leaflet Our countryside: a manifesto for the next government here:
This year’s AGM will be held on Friday, November 22, at our usual venue of Lenham village hall. After positive feedback from the last two years, we will hold it once again in the morning, starting at 10.30am and ending after lunch, which will be served at 12.30pm. As well as our usual presidential address we will be hearing from our keynote speaker, Crispin Truman OBE, chief executive of national CPRE. This is a chance for you to meet the team in person and find out more about the wonderful work that CPRE Kent is doing. We hope you will join us. Please let us know if you would like to appoint a proxy to vote if you are unable to attend, or if you would like to join us for lunch after the meeting (the charge for lunch is £12 per person, cheques payable to CPRE Kent, please, to be received no later than Thursday, November 14, or via BACS payment at the details in the invitation form posted below).
The Court of Appeal has rejected an attempt by Gladman Developments Ltd to overturn the refusal of permission to build up to 330 homes and an ‘Extra Care’ facility at Pond Farm, Newington, near Sittingbourne. The proposals were refused by a planning inspector and again by a High Court judge in 2017. Gladman took that decision to the Court of Appeal, where the decisions of the inspector and the High Court were upheld in a judgment handed down yesterday (September 12, 2019). CPRE Kent challenged the proposals as it was clear homes built in this location would be heavily dependent on car-based transport, and that building in this area would only worsen already unacceptable levels of air pollution along the A2 at Newington and Rainham. At the planning inquiry, Gladman argued that it had offered a financial contribution to undertake measures that would limit the effects of its development on air quality. However, CPRE Kent’s air-quality witness, Professor Stephen Peckham, argued there was no indication of how that contribution would be spent, nor any evidence provided that those measures would actually limit the use of petrol or diesel vehicles and in doing so reduce NO2 emissions. In refusing permission, the inspector agreed that air quality and human health would suffer if this development were to go ahead. Hilary Newport, director at CPRE Kent, said: “This important decision serves to underline that government simply must commit to its obligations on air quality. “We simply cannot continue to allow ‘business as usual’ planning decisions that ignore the impact of unsustainable transport on the health and well-being of communities. “We must act quickly to bring about significant changes in the way we plan for future homes, employment and travel needs.” Richard Knox-Johnston, vice-president of CPRE Kent, said: “We believe that winning this planning appeal represents the first time air-quality mitigation leading to health concerns has been given as a reason. “CPRE Kent used air quality in this case even though the local planning authority did not object. “In having this precedent tested in the High Court and subsequently in the Court of Appeal it has been shown that air-quality mitigation must now be taken into consideration in any planning application. “My thanks go to Professor Stephen Peckham for his expert advice without which we would not have been able to put our case.” CPRE Kent also wishes to thank the legal teams at Cornerstone Barristers and Richard Buxton Solicitors for their hard work and expertise.
All Kent’s local boroughs and districts, as well as Medway Council, will be holding elections on Thursday (May 2).
Local authorities control many of the decisions that we care passionately about at CPRE Kent. We depend on their decisions to keep our towns and villages vibrant, to ensure there are homes in which people can afford to live, and to make sure that services like public transport and waste collection and recycling are effective and efficient.
That is why it is so important to get out and vote, and to make your voice heard on Thursday! Whatever their political colour, the decisions made by your local councillors are important for your local community.
To find out in which local-council area you live, see here
To find out where your polling station is, see here
In the final run-up to the election, you can contact your local candidates and let them know the most important things to you and ask that they reflect this in their election promises.
One of the easiest ways to engage with your candidates is to send them an email or a letter. You should be able to find their email and postal addresses using the links above.
We have drafted an email/letter that you could send them – see here. Our manifesto, Stand Up For Our Local Countryside, can be found here if you would like to include it. And you can see our short video here
In line with the manifesto, we ask you to think about supporting the policies that support Kent’s countryside in the following ways:
Best use of land: respecting the constraints of designated landscapes, making use of brownfield sites and prioritising sustainable, public transport.
Thriving rural communities: getting the local council building more homes for social rent and prioritising local housing need over market demand.
Empowered communities: championing and upholding the voice of local people through the planning system
An enjoyable countryside: developing light-pollution policies and encouraging outreach and engagement programmes to provide equal access to the countryside.
Climate change and the countryside: setting a local authority climate change strategy and embedding climate change into all local policy areas.
You have the chance to make your voice heard on May 2nd: don’t miss it.
Farthingloe: under pressure again (pic Vicky Ellis)
The renewed threat to develop the Farthingloe Valley in the Kent Downs AONB has been confirmed.
We reported in June last year (see here) that applicant China Gateway International had requested Dover District Council provide a scoping opinion for an updated environmental impact assessment in preparation for a renewed application at the site.
This followed the Supreme Court’s confirmation, in December 2017, that planning permission for more than 500 houses and a 90-apartment retirement village at Great Farthingloe Farm, together with associated development at nearby Western Heights, remained quashed.
That case had been brought about by CPRE Kent challenging DDC’s granting of planning permission for the scheme in 2015.
The Supreme Court was backing the Court of Appeal’s verdict that DDC planning committee had not given legally adequate reasons for approving the application. DDC had challenged that Court of Appeal decision, necessitating the Supreme Court case.
Now, however, CGI has submitted “updated application documents” prior to redetermination by DDC.
The letter of submission from planning consultancy RPS, written on behalf of CGI, says: “The scheme has been subject to minor beneficial changes, incorporating advice from DDC and consultees.
“This has resulted in one change to the description of the development, reducing the number of residential units at Farthingloe from 521 to 512 units.”
Responding to the news, Hilary Newport, CPRE Kent director, said: “CPRE Kent maintains its original objections to these proposals. “There is no doubt that we need to solve the housing shortage facing both rural and urban areas, but we must build the right types of housing in the right places.
“The Farthingloe part of the site is a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), which should be given the highest levels of protection, and these plans represent a grossly inappropriate incursion to this protected landscape. “We know that the housing affordability crisis is particularly acute in the South East, yet these proposals will deliver no affordable or social housing at all; they will not provide the homes which are so desperately needed in the district. There is still no justification for sacrificing such a large area of AONB.
“We are particularly disappointed that the promoters still claim that the Farthingloe site is brownfield when it is clearly not – a quick check of Dover District Council’s own brownfield register confirms this. Part of the the site was used briefly as temporary accommodation land during the construction of the Channel Tunnel, but temporary permission for such uses does not grant brownfield status.
“Although DDC granted permission for this project, the Court of Appeal judged that its decision was wrong, since its planning committee failed to give legally adequate reasons for allowing substantial harm to an AONB.
“DDC chose to take that decision to the UK Supreme Court, where CPRE Kent had no option but to defend this challenge if we wished to see this site remain protected.
“And in December 2017 the Supreme Court Judgment confirmed its agreement with the Court of Appeal that there was no legally adequate justification to grant this permission.
“We can see no reason the legal position will be any different for the application this time around, since there is so little difference from the original proposals.”
Yes, Thursday, December 20, is the last day you can submit your comments on Highways England’s plans for the new Lower Thames Crossing.
We know that the pollution, congestion and delays at the existing Dartford-Thurrock crossings are intolerable, and agree that action needs to be taken to protect the lives and livelihoods of people living and working nearby, as well as those who use the crossing. However, the proposals for the new crossing will not fix these problems. The planned new crossing is now simply a mechanism to ‘unlock growth potential’, which means encouraging ever-more road journeys – not managing congestion.
It takes very little scrutiny of the proposal documents to realise that if the proposed crossing east of Gravesend and Tilbury were to be built, it would make barely any improvement on conditions at Dartford or western Thurrock.
Instead of an expensive and damaging new infrastructure project, in an area of the country that is already massively constrained and over-stressed, and which will lock in another generation to damaging car-dependent domestic and commercial development, CPRE Kent wants a better solution. We are calling for a sustainable national transport strategy that does not encourage the ceaseless growth of road-based traffic but focuses on genuinely sustainable policies for the movement of people and goods.
We will be submitting our consultation response next week and we’ll post it on this website for anyone interested to check out.
Meanwhile, you might like to look at some of our earlier comments:
We’ve been made aware someone is using the firstname.lastname@example.org address to send scam emails to people whose data was compromised in the Yahoo security breach. Be assured that we took immediate steps to stop this but it seems some ‘ghost’ messages might still be bouncing. If you have a yahoo email address and receive a spoof email seemingly from us, be sure not to click on any links. Contact the office if you are concerned (01233 714540).
In the week that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report telling us we need to take immediate action to curb catastrophic climate change, we learn of the opening of the next stage of consultation on plans for the new Lower Thames Crossing (LTC).
The consultation website bills it as the solution to “unlocking opportunities and economic growth for the region and the country… offering new connections and better journeys”.
Earlier stages of consultation promised that the new LTC was essential to solve congestion and air pollution at the existing, undoubtedly over-stretched, Dartford crossings.
Even so, scrutiny of those documents showed that, on opening, a new crossing would reduce traffic flows at Dartford by a pitifully low 14 per cent.
This is a tiny benefit compared with the environmental and community harm that would be caused by the biggest UK road project since construction of the M25.
It is now clear that a new crossing will not be about achieving environmental and public benefits. Rather, it is about creating more vehicle journeys, about intensifying the housing crisis in the South East and about opening up ever more green spaces for development.
Last year, colleagues in CPRE’s national team published research showing unequivocally that increasing road capacity simply resulted in more vehicle journeys: we can’t build our way out of congestion. There’s a good little video summarising the report here.
At a time when we need to radically rethink how we use energy to move ourselves and our stuff around, the government’s focus on new road capacity is out of date.
Instead of investing solely in new roads, we want government to focus on better public transport links, to rationalise the over-reliance on road-based freight movement and to support planning policies that reduce the need to travel by car and support walking and cycling.
Don’t miss your chance to have your say on the proposals: the consultation closes on Thursday, December 20, and the documents can be found here.
Our AGM will be held on Friday 17th November 2017, at the usual venue of Lenham Community Centre. This time we will hold the AGM in the morning, starting at 10:30, and close the meeting after lunch which will be served at 12:30. Please let us know if you would like to appoint a proxy if you are unable to vote, or if you would like to join us for lunch after the AGM (the charge for lunch is £12 per person, cheques payable to CPRE Kent, please, to be received no later than 8th November). The agenda, location details and forms for lunch and proxy votes, together with the minutes of last year’s AGM, are available at the links below:
CPRE Kent has welcomed Maidstone Borough Council’s decision to postpone the adoption of its Local Plan.
The decision by the local authority follows a letter from Faversham MP Helen Whately to Sajid Javid, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, asking him to ‘call in’ the Plan.
She was expressing concerns about the level of housebuilding proposed in the Plan, the prospect of business development at junction 8 of the M20 and lack of infrastructure.
The council had been expected to adopt the Plan at a meeting on Wednesday, but that has now been postponed in the wake of the letter to Mr Javid.
Gary Thomas, CPRE’S Maidstone branch chairman, said: “It’s encouraging to see Maidstone council postponing the meeting due to the uncertainties around the Plan being adopted.
“They’re listening to people’s concerns and that in itself is a step forward.
“From Maidstone’s perspective, the junction 8 site is the worst in the whole borough for employment purposes as people would be travelling across much of the county for any work created there. There would be little benefit to Maidstone.”
This new consultation (Sep 14 – Nov 9) is looking at ways to deliver even more homes in the areas of highest pressure: in the introduction, Sajid Javid says: “Nobody likes indiscriminate, unplanned and unwelcome development. But most of us are willing to welcome new homes if they’re well-designed, built in the right places, and are planned with the co-operation of the local community. To win the support of local residents, we have to build homes people want to live alongside as well as in.”
He’s not wrong in saying that, but communities all across Kent are reeling in the face of already impossibly high housing targets. The new methodology for calculating housing need will see significant increases in those targets in every district across the county. Simply raising the targets for housing delivery is only http://findviagra.com going to force yet more land to be allocated; it will not direct the development that we need into the most sustainable locations.
It won’t help protect green space or the best and most versatile agricultural land. It won’t magically put right the fact that Kent is already severely water-stressed. And never forget that simply building more houses doesn’t force house prices down: the housebuilding industry has never followed the ‘pile them high and sell them cheap’ mantra of the supermarkets. We need a proper national spatial planning strategy, and planning authorities need support to deliver genuinely affordable housing that meets public needs first. Only then will communities feel able to welcome new homes.
See here for the proposed target increases in Kent and Medway: righthomes and see the consultation itself here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/planning-for-the-right-homes-in-the-right-places-consultation-proposals
CPRE South East Region has today added its voice to requests for the Secretary of State to ‘call in’ the Maidstone Local Plan for closer scrutiny of its allocation of a sensitive green field site near J8 of the M20. See the press release here: maidstone local plan call in. Photo Credit: Stephen Sutherland.
…a big shout out to the organisers of this year’s Tractor Fest and Country Fair at Biddenden on Saturday and Sunday (August 19 and 20)! if you are planning on being there, be sure to come and say hello to the wonderful CPRE Kent team.
We have today (12th July) submitted our consultation response to RiverOak Strategic Partnership’s consultation into the future of Manston airport.
We are concerned that the environmental and social impacts of noise and air pollution outweigh the claimed economic benefits. In contrast, the opportunity to convert this brownfield site to mixed commercial and residential use offers more realistic employment opportunities and would help of safeguard the best quality agricultural land which would otherwise be required to meet Thanet’s objectively assessed housing need.
Manston airport by Simon Moores, flickr
Director Hilary Newport said “We don’t think a new airport here would provide any overall social or economic benefits, and there is a real danger of converting the site into an airport is that is highly unlikely to be viable, and would therefore again become a blight on the area, and retard the more useful, and economically and socially beneficial uses for another decade.”
CPRE Kent also considers the negative impact of night flights on surrounding communities to be unacceptable.
The consultation period closes on 23rd July. You can read our consultation response here.