Skip to content

Infrastructure consultation: CPRE gives its views

Elementary Admin
By Elementary Admin &
17th January 2018
What will infrastructure development do to Kent? (pic SOS Kent)

“A distributed network of consolidation hubs offers a very different vision of modernity to the vast Operation Stack lorry park currently proposed to service channel freight at the foot of the Kent Downs AONB.
“The development of smaller consolidation hubs should not be seen as an alternative to the use of rail for transporting freight.
“Globally, important trading partners are now making increasing use of rail, with China launching direct rail freight services to Europe and France now using scanning equipment that can more easily identify stowaways on freight entering the Channel Tunnel, thus alleviating security concerns.”
We feature the above passage as a Kent hook to pull you into CPRE’s response to the National Infrastructure Commission’s (NIC) interim consultation on a National Infrastructure Assessment (NIA).
At almost 6,700 words, the document might need a couple of sittings, but it includes plenty to give food us for thought.
The consultation, entitled Congestion, Capacity and Carbon, spanned many issues, with CPRE electing to focus its response on 10 questions, ranging from Brexit to water policy, autonomous vehicles and land capture.
CPRE will be consulting with the commission further before publication of the final NIA this year.
You can read our response to the interim consultation here.

Wednesday, January 17, 2018

  • A number of important documents have yet to emerge. For example, a rigorous transport plan and a finalised air-quality assessment. The latter is critical given that allocations at Teynham will feed extra traffic into AQMAs.
  • There seems to be no coherent plan for infrastructure delivery – a key component of the plan given the allocations being proposed near the already crowded Junction 7.
  • There seems to have been little or no cooperation with neighbouring boroughs or even parish councils within Swale itself.

The removal of a second consultation might have been understandable if this final version of the plan were similar to that being talked about at the beginning of the consultation process. It is, however, radically different in the following ways:

  • There has been a major shift in the balance of housing allocations, away from the west of the borough over to the east, especially around the historic town of Faversham. This is a move that raises many concerns.
  • A new large allocation, with accompanying A2 bypass, has appeared around Teynham and Lynsted, to which we are objecting.
  • Housing allocations in the AONB around Neames Forstal that were judged “unsuitable” by the council’s own officers have now appeared as part of the housing numbers.
  • Most of the housing allocations being proposed are on greenfield sites, many of them on Grade 1 agricultural land – a point to which we are strongly objecting.

Concerns about the rush to submit the plan

The haste with which the plan is being prepared is especially worrying given the concentration of housing in Faversham. If the town is to take a large amount of new housing, it is imperative that the policies concerning the area are carefully worked out to preserve, as far as possible, the unique nature of the town. The rush to submit the plan is likely to prove detrimental.

As Swale does not have a five-year land housing supply, it is open to speculative development proposals, many of which would run counter to the ideas contained in the current plan. Some are already appearing. This is a common situation, and one that, doubtless, is a reason behind Swale’s haste.

Our overriding fear, however, is that this emphasis on haste is ultimately going to prove counterproductive. This is because it is our view that the plan, in its current form, is unlikely to pass independent examination. We are urging Swale to listen to and act upon the comments being made about the plan and to return the plan to the council with appropriate modifications before submitting it to the Secretary of State.

Essentially, this means treating the current consultation not as the final one but as the ‘lost’ second consultation.

The consultation ends on Friday 30 April and we strongly urge residents to make their opinions known if they have not already done so.

Further information