Disappointed with Dover
Published: 27-01-2010
Gemma Watts, Publicity Officer, Protect Kent
27 January 2010
CPRE Protect Kent and the CPRE Dover District Committee have expressed their disappointment that Dover’s high growth strategy has been given the green light.
In her report just submitted to Dover District Council, Planning Inspector Sue Turner has found the Dover Core Strategy to be ‘sound’. This means that the Council’s plan to build 14,000 new homes in the District, including nearly 6,000 at Whitfield, over the next 20 to 30 years will now go ahead.
Protect Kent objected in the strongest possible terms to the Core Strategy, which will see large-scale development on greenfield land. While it is Government Policy that 60% of new development should be on previously-used land, the Council’s strategy will see the vast majority of its future development on greenfield sites.
Brian Lloyd, CPRE Protect Kent’s Senior Planner, said:
“We presented a strong case against the high growth strategy, and it is extremely disappointing that the Inspector seemingly gave scant regard to our concerns in endorsing fully the growth strategy put forward by the Council.
We remain very concerned that the strategy is very aspirational and that the anticipated economic regeneration on the back of large scale greenfield housing development will not materialise.”
“The strategy depends on expanding the population of the district by building a large amount of new housing, which in turn will boost the supply of available labour and thus stimulate investment in more employment development. But there are many unknowns.
With thousands of construction workers having been laid-off, will the housebuilders have the capacity to build such a large number of houses? As we come out of recession will the housebuilders see Dover as a priority for investment, or will they look to develop in more profitable areas of the south east? Will the people moving to Dover actually want to work in Dover? Won’t they already have jobs elsewhere?
The council’s own research shows that out commuting as a result of the high speed rail service will increase significantly. Then there is the whole issue of investment in supporting services and infrastructure. At the moment the Council has no detailed delivery plan for this.”
Protect Kent was not alone in challenging the Council’s high growth strategy. The Whitfield Action Group (WAG) was set up to fight the expansion plans for Whitfield whilst ‘Deal With It’ raised major concerns about the environmental impact of large scale development.
Rosemary Rechter, the ‘Deal With It’ Co-ordinator, said:
“We are very concerned that the effects of such large scale development on Climate Change have not been taken seriously. This should be at the very core of the strategy, not a weak add on extra.
There is no mention of the risks posed by peak oil, or sign that this needs to be taken into account with respect to land use patterns, transport, and the major impact this will have on the way we live.”
"Dover District is one of the most water stressed in the country, and we have serious doubts that Veolia Water would be able to meet the needs of 14,000 extra households. Our doubts have been increased by hearing that South East Water, from whom Veolia planned to buy a significant proportion of water, have had their plan turned down by Defra.”
Of greatest concern to CPRE Protect Kent is the significant encroachment into the countryside and the loss of farmland. Mr Lloyd said:
“Our farmland is a valuable and finite resource, and should not be squandered lightly. In the face of Climate Change and a growing population our ability to produce sufficient food is becoming a major national problem. We need homes and jobs, but we also need to be able to feed ourselves, and isn’t Kent supposed to be the Garden of England?”
– END –