Local Plan

Local Plan Update, 10/08/2016

Click here to see the update: http://kingsnorthparishcouncil.co.uk/local-plan-update/
 

Next meeting of the Local Plan Committee Members

(Members of the public are very welcome to attend to observe this Committee Members meeting,

but are not able at this time to actively participate.)

You can contact the group by email at:-

keepkingsnorthrural@virginmedia.com

Your email will be responded to as quickly as possible

CAN YOU HELP US?

Delivering leaflets

E mailing your comments

Visiting our Keep Kingsnorth Rural Facebook page

Posting your comments to the Parish Office

 

Update on the local plan.

Following the workshops held in September when the proposed sites in Kingsnorth were considered, things have been fairly quiet.  in the meantime there has been a lot of activity on the Jarvis/Pentland planning application.  Well done to so many people who have written to the planners expressing their opposition to the plan. As Highways England and KCC highways have asked many questions about the affect the development could have on the M20 and the A2070 it may be some time before we hear any more.

In the meantime work on the Local plan goes on.  We had expected to hear which sites in KIngsnorth were being considered in early December and this may still be the case.  We have been told, however that the draft plan should go the ABC cabinet for consideration in April and that a period of consultation will follow that. eventually the final draft will be sent to the government.  It is anticipated that the Public examination will take place in late 2016 or early 2017.

Updated by: Hilary Moorby

Ashford Borough Council Local Plan: The Call for Sites response.

As you are aware, the government requires local authorities to produce a local plan that will set the planning priorities for Ashford, this includes land supply for housing. In preparation for the review of the local plan, Ashford Borough Council (ABC) had to ask for sites to be put forward for development, these sites will then be reviewed and only then included in the plan.

The potential number of sites in Kingsnorth is considerable and includes all the fields behind Church Hill and Magpie Hall Road, changing the face of Kingsnorth as a village completely. There will also be the large scale development at Chilmington Green which is adjacent to Kingsnorth which when added together with the proposed sites in Kingsnorth would provide thousands of new homes in the area.

As a Parish Council we believe Kingsnorth has contributed enough to the provision of sites for future development and we need to develop a robust strategic response to the proposals  which will form our consultation to the local plan.

We have held two consultation events in conjunction with ABC which were poorly attended, a summary of responses received and a copy of the proposed sites is shown below.

A Local Plan submission committee has been formed  consisting of Parish Councillors and residents. The committee is led by a local resident –  David Day

Technical help will be provided from ABC and other outside agencies so we can scope what needs to be done, set a timetable and meet the submission deadline which is scheduled initially as late 2014, this is not that far away.

Kingsnorth Parish Council Update

At the last Parish Council meeting we agreed to send a holding response to ABC regarding the call for sites in the local plan. Detailed below is a copy of that response in Word so you can download and use it as a template for your response if you don’t feel confident in drafting something yourself. By all means add any additional comments but we are holding back on responses to individual sites until ABC do their first cut ,as some may not get through.

Naturally this does not means you should not be forming your opinions or gathering supporting evidence for or against sites.

The joint local plan committee is also preparing a draft for residents to use as a template which we hope will be signed off at the end of November.

It is important that ABC receive as many responses as possible to indicate our interest and concerns so at this stage volume counts.

It is difficult to maintain an interest in projects like this as there are long periods of inactivity, that does not mean we are not working on it only that there is nothing to report.

 

Alison Breese

Chair Kingsnorth PC.

 

Kingsnorth Parish Council Initial Local Plan Response

The new Local Plan was proposed to be employment led and we hope that this continues to be the guiding principle of the plan.

We believe the number of new homes proposed for Ashford is sufficient  to meet local housing need over the life of the plan, up to 2030. South East Ashford has contributed significantly to the provision of new homes and we feel as a Parish, Kingsnorth has made a sufficient contribution to that provision. Any future development in the Parish should be supportive of existing communities on a piecemeal basis and not on a large scale which  would create a third urban extension to Ashford, linking Cheeseman’s Green with Chilmington Green. With the development of Park Farm, Finbury and Chilmington Green, South Ashford has taken the lion’s share of new provision in the borough and the very things that made the area attractive are in danger of being lost. Consideration should be given to identifying a green belt between these schemes so they maintain their rural attraction and enable biodiversity to increase.

Kingsnorth Parish would object very strongly to any attempt to create a third urban extension in the Parish, such an extension would destroy the village and it surrounding farmland.  The Parish is already struggling to accommodate the existing increase in population in terms of new infrastructure, medical facilities and recreational Facilities.  If a further large increase in population were proposed then the existing population would be extremely disadvantaged.

We do accept that there could be areas where small scale development could usefully strengthen the village but we cannot at this stage suggest where this could be. We also feel that small scale local extensions of existing communities around Ashford would all contribute to the required growth and have less impact on one area like Kingsnorth.

Ashford needs to be clear about its own long term vision and aspirations as a town, not grow in response  to pressure from London and other areas in the South East, we have done enough to contribute towards the regional and national housing shortage.

The infrastructure to support  existing new homes is not adequate and an indication should be  given as to how improvements could  be made to cope with any further expansion. The Local Plan must address this issue prior to sites being considered.

The principle of developing brown field sites before Greenfield should be a guiding principle of the plan. The alleged extra costs in developing these sites should not be used as an argument to support the development of green field sites.   Recent government guidance indicates that priority should be given to the development of brown field sites and that people do not wish to see further urban sprawl.

The range of house types must not be limited to primarily family housing, mixed communities should be the aim so that all sections of society are catered for. The plan should take into account the better use of existing  stock not purely at growth.

Now that approval has been given to fund junction 10 A priorities should be given to developing all the land that will now be released  before designating additional new large scale schemes.

A communications strategy with the strap line KEEP KINGSNORTH RURAL has been developed

Kingsnorth Local Area Plan Map showing Submissions

map2

Consultation on proposed sites in Kingsnorth summary.
Site No No of Responses Comments
N03 2 Site floods & developer does not fulfill existing obligations on other sites.
WE24 1 Loss of woodland.
WS2 1 Why provision for a travellers site?
WS11 11 Site floods /extra traffic/over development when taken in conjunction with Chilmington Green.
WS6 3 Site floods/increase in traffic.
WS7 5 Increase in traffic/Flooding /Over development  when taken in conjunction with CG
WS16 6 Increased traffic/flooding/need a buffer zone/over development when taken in conjunction with CG.
WS16C 5 Increased traffic/flooding/need a buffer zone/over development when taken in conjunction with CG.
WS32 6 Increased traffic on Magpie Hall Road/flooding.
WS56 2 Flooding
WS57 1 Over development when taken in conjunction with CG.
WE4 1 Flooding/Infrastructure/traffic site acces/use brownfield sites first
WE16D 6 Flooding/Infrastructure/traffic site acces/use brownfield sites first
WE16B 4 Flooding/Infrastructure/traffic site acces/use brownfield sites first
WE16E 2 Flooding/Infrastructure/traffic site acces/use brownfield sites first
WE16F 3 Rights of way over the site/over development of the site.
WE16A 1 Flooding/Infrastructure/traffic site acces/use brownfield sites first
WE37 1 Nothing should be built in a 5 mile radius of Kingsnorth village/ preserve
conservation area and definition of village/maintain wildlife habitat/
keep Kingsnorth rural/traffic issues.
WE18 1 Nothing should be built in a 5 mile radius of Kingsnorth village/ preserve
conservation area and definition of village/maintain wildlife habitat/
keep Kingsnorth rural/traffic issues.
WE17 1 Nothing should be built in a 5 mile radius of Kingsnorth village/ preserve
conservation area and definition of village/maintain wildlife habitat/
keep Kingsnorth rural/traffic issues.
WS4 3  Flooding/infrastrucure /traffic/village identity/buffer zone between existing and propsed development.
32 Feedback Forms Submitted

GENERAL COMMENTS

Why so many sites in Kingsnorth?
Develop Brownfield sites first, Ashford has plenty
Loss of open space and wildlife habitat
Loss of agricultural land when we need to feed a growing population
Lack of supporting infrastructure, developer should pay for it up front
Loss of village identity
Buffer zones between existing and proposed development
Redefine the Conservation area
Increase in traffic, particularly in Magpie Hall Road and Church Hill
Existing section 106 agreements need to be upheld and monitored
Why a site for travellers?
Flooding
The development at Chilmington Green needs to be taken into account when reviewing potential sites in Kingsnorth as when combined leads to an over development of the area
Need for a Master Plan
Loss of woodland