Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Indeed, Howard, multi occupancy (not sure who brought it up) is probably not the reason for so many cars in the Clarendons and Balfour Road. The average number of cars in the UK can be calculated as equal to the number of households.
This the point I'm making.
In whitfield, 6,000 new homes will possibly equate to 6,000 more cars.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Alexander D wrote:Paul, in post 60, Roger writes "Park and Ride may also be introduced, thereby, also cutting down traffic."
MAY! Not will.
Where would the car-parks be? Does this appear in the core strategy?
Dover Park & Ride and Bus Rapid Transit Routing Study"
http://www.dover.gov.uk/pdf/Park%20and%20Ride_BRT%20Text.pdf
I'm getting rather good at this Googling malarky
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Alexander D wrote:Indeed, Howard, multi occupancy (not sure who brought it up) is probably not the reason for so many cars in the Clarendons and Balfour Road. The average number of cars in the UK can be calculated as equal to the number of households.
This the point I'm making.
In whitfield, 6,000 new homes will possibly equate to 6,000 more cars.
You are assuming that in 20 years time still cars will be affordable to everyone, not likely at the rates the price of fuel etc are escallating !!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Ah Paul. Should your question be referred to me, I have a notion of the core strategy, and I have studied not only that, but also the consultation process of 2008 leading up to the 2010 finalisation.
I do see - and have seen in the past - the fancy pictures DDC and (prospect developers?) have printed on the DDC website of large avenues with not one car to be seen on the road. And a happy young blonde mother with her toddler, smiling while being "explained to" and "convinced" by a councillor (or prospect developer?) how happy the family(the whole community) will be once 6,000 new homes be built at Whitfield.
Whether I BELIEVE this, is another question.
Benevolent People's Banana Republic comes to mind.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
That's good then. if you are reading all of the documentation then you will already know of the links to Transport Strategies and Park and Ride that I have posted above !
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul Wells wrote
in post 90:
"I live on the outskirts of Deal and certainly don't go into Deal every day..."
And Paul Wells also wrote:
in post 82, on the CGI thread:
I drive through it (Folkestone Road) most days Alexander.
Yes, Paul, you don't drive every day into Deal, but you do drive almost every day into Dover...
Which is what so many people do, and 10,000 more houses in and around Dover would mean sheer mayhem on our roads.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Alexander D wrote:Paul Wells wrote
in post 90:
"I live on the outskirts of Deal and certainly don't go into Deal every day..."
And Paul Wells also wrote:
in post 82, on the CGI thread:
I drive through it (Folkestone Road) most days Alexander.
Yes, Paul, you don't drive every day into Deal, but you do drive almost every day into Dover...
Which is what so many people do, and 10,000 more houses in and around Dover would mean sheer mayhem on our roads.
It's not a very good basis for your argumen as I made it up that I drive through it every day, if I drive through it once a month it is too much!! I do know Folkestone Road well enough to comment on it though
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Most if not all brown-filled sites are being looked at by developers and where appropriate plans worked on, but for high numbers, certain other areas need to be developed.
Brown-field sites can be looked at for commercial as well as residential use of course.
Roger
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Is there really that much 'brown field' in Dover ?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Not in central Dover Paul, but some round Coombe Valley area and a bit here and there, but not for great numbers of houses.
When a developer has identified somewhere he would like to develop and contacts DDC planning department, they should be afforded all possible co-operation - not carte blanche and help.
No unnecessary delays or obstacles put in their way - afterall, time is money and in many cases, a great deal of money.
We want and need developers to come and spend their money here.
Roger
Guest 687- Registered: 2 Jun 2009
- Posts: 513
I think Dover has been well served by brown field development, you have only to look at Folkestone Road,Maison Dieu Road and Park Avenue as examples but this does not mean I condone carte blanche rural development. What we should bear in mind is that those 14000 homes will never be built but are merely a pipe dream and a smoke screen that is a very expensive way of spending our money.
Karlos- Location: Dover
- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 2,551
http://www.dover.gov.uk/pdf/Park%20and%20Ride_BRT%20Text.pdf
Quickly scanned through this, there's a map of the proposed route (page 7/8), it appears to go through open farm land near B&Q, parallel to the A2 and then joins the road from Guston before going down Castle Hill.
It also suggests things like bus lanes down Folkestone Road.
Of course, all these new residents of Whitfield will just probably drive to Tesco, Canterbury or Westwood Cross.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
we have a brownfield site in malvern road within walking distance of the station and town centre that has been used as an unofficial tip for the last 20 years.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
The plot of land just behind the advertising board (next to the old Boston Guest House) is owned by J.C. Decaux; there is another plot behind that, that has an extant planning permission for a small residential plot.
Roger
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, there is no systematic campaign from me to block all developments concerning house-building in and around Dover.
My reservations apply to building on green land, farm and woodland and protected areas, such as a Scheduled Ancient Monument.
My problem with the core strategy is not least the traffic problems in Dover, which would only get worse through mass building of houses.
A reasonable core strategy with reasonable numbers of new houses would be welcome, and also if it addressed the need to create more employment for local people, rather than looking at how to attract tens of thousands more people to settle here in the hope that one day some very big company might hit Dover (Boing? VW? Google? Airbus?)
Currently, the core strategy overlooks the fact that much employment in the already existing production centres in Dover District go to non-British nationals, and therefore non-locals.
It needs revising big-time, with an examining of conscience: is this right, allowing local people to languish in unemployment while others come over in mass and get the factory jobs?
A core strategy should have a plan regards local employment and should be centred first and foremost on LOCAL people.
Our Councils are NOT elected to put the interests of others above the interests of the people they are supposed to serve.
To the few: please leave out any "racism" remarks.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Finished reading all the links I posted to traffic stragegies etc ?
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
How does a council "create more employment for local people" ?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
So, Paul, then I assume you have not read the consultation process 2008 leading up to the core strategy.
Secondly, Paul, can you show me where I have written that the council should "create more employment for local people" ?
Please read my post properly, then perhaps consult the consultation process 2008 which DDC made: there is a lot in it about employment in Dover and District and how this employment, according to DDC, justifies the building of 14,000 new homes.
One point made in the 2008 process of the core strategy is that Pfizer would expand, and another point was that "4,000 new jobs" were imminent (with failure to mention from whom).
However, Pfizer are all but closing down now, and where these 4,000 new jobs are, I don't know, unless they refer to Morrisions, which set up since 2008. Yet in this case it is not 4,000 new jobs.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Alexander D wrote:So, Paul, then I assume you have not read the consultation process 2008 leading up to the core strategy.
.
No as I don't have an obsession with it
