An Open Letter

John Bunnett, CEO

Ashford Borough Council

Civic Centre, Tannery Lane

Ashford, Kent TN23 1PL

14 March 2011

Unwanted houses on Greenfield sites. Why?

Dear Chief Executive,

Please will you note this open letter and pass it on to the Council Leader Cllr Peter Wood. Cllr Wood either says he has not received the emails I have sent him over recent months, or has not answered the questions in them. They concern key issues on the development of Ashford. As Cllr Wood has not offered to discuss the subjects when the absence of replies has been raised with him, I want to ensure that this letter gets to him. The people of the Borough should know the current position and be given some honest answers.

The Ashford Independent Group, of which I am Leader, is not against all building development in Ashford Borough. However we are opposed to the large unwanted, unnecessary and very unpopular developments planned by the Council on Greenfield sites, now misleadingly referred to as Urban Extensions. There is no local need for them and they irretrievably destroy hundreds of acres of countryside and its ecology. Ashford does not have a Cathedral, Castle or other historic attraction; only acres of beautiful countryside known as the Garden of England. There are thousands of residents who live in these areas whose quality of life would be diminished if building goes ahead.

When the Labour government’s sustainable communities legislation (known as the Prescott Plan) came into being, the Council Leader told us we were required to build 31,000 houses between the years 2000 and 2030, and create 28,000 jobs. At the time the Borough population was about 104,000, almost exactly 50:50 urban: rural. If there were 2 people per house, it would equate to 26,000 houses; if 3 people per house, 17,333 houses in each area.

The Government made it clear that the development was to be for Ashford Town, not the rural areas. It was to rejuvenate and strengthen the Town. It was therefore to be central and concentric, Brownfield sites first, it was to be jobs and infrastructure led. The Greenfield site plans are obviously not urban and the Chilmington development alone will be about the size of two Tenterdens with a town centre that will compete with Ashford.

The Council has provided information (sources available) to confirm the current position. Their records show that 5177 houses have been completed between 2001 and 31 March 2010. Since then 6301 more houses are in the planning process with some 337 already started. 3082 houses in the central urban area are also under planning preparation. This total of 14560 units does not include the proposed major developments on Greenfield sites of Chilmington, up to 7000 units, Kennington up to 600 units, Tenterden up to 500 units and Willesborough a further 280 units.

We argue that at best the total number of homes actually built and planned represents an increase in the Ashford urban area of 56% or at the worst 84%. We believe that this more than meets local need and makes a large contribution to the housing stock in South East England. Maidstone, Canterbury, Dover and Folkestone are all expanding without any cohesive plan being apparent. When asked who all the houses were for, we were told that they were for migrants from job-short areas such as North East England, and immigrants as Ashford is near the ports of Folkestone and Dover. When Cllr Bartlett was recently Council Leader, he recognised the public concern, delayed one project and promised reviews. Regrettably after an accident he was removed from the Leadership.

So why do we need all these additional houses on Ashford’s Greenfield sites? The South East Growth Agenda has been scrapped. The new Government’s Localism Bill under preparation is due to become law at the end of 2011. The Bill clearly states that local people will be able to make decisions on these issues. Mr Pickles, the Secretary of State, has said that people whose lives are affected by such building developments should be involved in the decision process. So we know that these houses are not locally needed, we know that the new Government wants local people to decide, we know that the Council’s plans are hugely unpopular with for example a 3500 plus signature Petition in the Chilmington area. So again we ask why is the Leadership of Ashford Borough Council pressing ahead.

The Council argues that they are legally bound by the Core Strategy. However the Strategy can be reviewed and quickly as not all of it would have to be changed, just the controversial building sites. There is a strong argument that this should be done. The jobs target has not been met, and the figures include a large percentage of Public Sector jobs. There isn’t the money for the infrastructure, and the KCC Select Committee on drinking water supply in Kent said Ashford will start to run our of water in 2016 if it continues to build and the Broad Oak Reservoir (plans shelved again) is not built. Kent has to import 40% of its drinking water. The pipeline to Bewl Water is not the answer. Bewl has to take most of its water from the Medway which is at capacity supplying the Thames Gateway developments. Also the roads in all the cases mentioned are incapable of taking the extra traffic being planned. If these controversial sites are removed, there are plenty of organic or natural development sites to meet future local demand including windfall sites in the Town and 1000 houses earmarked for the villages.

So again, why is the Ashford Borough Council Leadership pressing ahead with these unpopular, unneeded, unnecessary, highly destructive dormitory commuter sites? Why is the Leadership not listening to the local people? We know that landowners and developers can make huge profits on Greenfield developments, but what is in it for Ashford Borough Council?

Yours sincerely,

Cllr Peter Davison

Leader, Ashford Independent Group