Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
paulb;
please excuse me for going off thread for a moment.
lorraine;
rather interesting you would ever class me as elite lol(dont tell reg lol)
if you feel this to be my being democratically elected to the councils then ok i hold my hands up, but like yourself just did what i could to move a mountain(what it felt llike lol)
certainly people choose to do there bit in a number of differing ways,
it could be being on the council,
joining a number of activities as a volunteer
being a lobbyist
plus many many other ways to try to do your bit
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
1177 Excellent post from Lorraine. Sums up the situation really.
I also recall, at the petition signing, someone from Maxton saying they were against the planning project.
The proposed traffic from a Farthingloe settlement would pass along Folkestone Road too, one may assume. Not goo for the many children playing all day along Folkestone Road.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
People/children, don't play along the Folkestone Road Alexander - they walk, drive, cycle, but not play. You don't stop a development because children "may" play somewhere.
There are always exceptions to every rule - I don't make those exceptions, but they do come along from time to time and sometimes they are accepted.
Roger
Guest 685- Registered: 5 May 2009
- Posts: 85
Roger (#1183)
In my posting of 7 July 2012 #1024, I pointed out that with regards to schools, the NPPF p17 para 72 states that the Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. LDC-Open Space Policy and Standards (LDC-OPS) requires designated play areas for developments of 15 family dwellings or more. The China Gateway International (CGI) Social and Economic Report p22 para 9.78 states that their proposed development anticipates having 1,572 residents and as I have already noted above (#969), CGI plan 705 residences. Regarding schools CGI P&R p31 para 7.16 says that local schools will cope.
Further, with regards to the Farthingloe proposal, a veiled threat is made when they say, about this implemented business park ... (should it) ... ever be built, much greater harm to (the) setting will occur (CGI-HS p66).
LDF DM 15 states that development, which would result in the loss of, or adversely affect the character or appearance, of the countryside will only be permitted according to strict criteria. Both the business development and CGI's plan for 52-houses and a 90-apartment retirement block will have a detrimental impact on the adjacent 1968 designated Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Moreover, CGI P&G p28+29 para 7.4 say that at a site-specific level their Farthingloe is particularly suitable for development proposed given that: The area at Farthingloe is well located in relation to the strategic highway network, which will minimise traffic effects in residential areas.
From the CGI company reports, it can be assumed that CGI expect the residents to work in London - see posting #1177 above. Because of the proximity of the A20, residents will go that way to Folkestone West or Ashford International for the train to London. For retail, entertainment and similar purposes it would not be wrong to expect them to do the same and therefore putting a question mark over sustainability.
As stated in paragraph 12 above, the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts (NPPF para 79 p19 and Section 9 pp19-21) and there is no doubt that if planning permission is given it will put the whole of the Farthingloe Valley in jeopardy of what, effectively, will become a ribbon development
The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent ribbon developments. The essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. By CGI's own admission to their shareholders in their earlier statements, CGI's final intention is a large-scale ribbon development along the Farthingloe valley and to purge Western Heights of its green infrastructure.
Lorraine
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Can't understand the reluctance to answer my posting #1126
If 'someone' came along and wanted to restore the Heights to their former glory, clear the trees, make the moats accessible, turn them into a visitor attraction with hundreds of thousands of visitors, with road improvements and associated infrastructure
Would you support any of these if CGI dropped their plans for the Heights ??
Or will we see a petition against this or the memorial???
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
They're questions they can't answer I guess Paul.
Roger
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
Or will not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i can understand why nobody has replied to it paul, very much like going into town and asking people if they would like a full teaching hospital similar to guys with a massive free car park.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Roger, your post 1183 stating that children do not play along Folkestone Road, does not correspond to reality.
There ate areas along this road where children play and where children are generally present along the road, just about on a continuous time-scale, until dusk.
The fact that these children, when playing, do not speak English, does not exclude the fact that they are constantly on Folkestone Road, playing, standing around, and continuously breathing in the pollution.
I am prepared to carry this matter forward, as quite clearly DDC do not attribute any significance to this factor.
Your statement in regards, as local ward, is woeful, Roger!
The Police are aware of the facts, and last year distributed a circular to houses in this area complaining about children playing around Priory Station harassing passengers and throwing stones. This is one example.
Children are visibly present at all times of day along Folkestone Road in the Priory area, standing around or playing,
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
some are just toddlers, amazed there have been no fatalities so far.
malvern road junction with the folkestone road is the worst place for it.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
i can confirm children play in and around the folkestone road somtimes in the street
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Think Alexander doesn't know what to answer as he doesn't have any comments from people like CPRE to repeat parrot fashion......
Been nice knowing you :)
SWWood- Location: Dover
- Registered: 30 May 2012
- Posts: 261
Paul's questions seem perfectly straightfoward. People may start to draw their own conclusions from the lack of any answers.
Paul, how did the weekend go? I hope the improved weather on Sunday made up for Saturday's deluge.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, I'll have to wait for instructions from Lorraine, or for another email from Protect Kent, or a press release from English Heritage.
But, if I don't know what to say, Eurideka will tell me.
She told me to say, providing CGI drop their proposals, or these proposals are rejected in block by DDC, and no housing is built either on Western Heights or Farthingloe, and no conference centre either, and no hotel, then she doesn't mind if some Napoleonic defences are kept up to standard for visitors to see.
She also said that these visitors - if hundreds of thousands - should not really be supposed to drive cars up Western Heights, as. if they did, this would dramatically change the peaceful aspect of the area.
It would be preferably if they came by train, bus or ferry, and walked up there, or, if by coach or car, parked elsewhere and walked up the Heights.
At least that's what Alexandra told me.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Children don't play IN the road, they may play or sit or whatever, on the pavement, but I have never seen children playing IN the road and I either drive or walk up and down the road every day and different times of the day.
What you are promoting Alexander and the others who oppose any kind of development, is a slow death of all the buildings and a return to nature of uncontrolled weeds, trees an scrub, as it was long before any buildings were put up there.
Is that progress ? I don't think so.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
roger;
although its not relevant to this thread
i have to admit i have seen children play in the road
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Then they must run indoors everytime they see me coming down the road.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 685- Registered: 5 May 2009
- Posts: 85
I was horrified to read in Alexander's posting #1189 that children play in Folkestone Road - confirmed by Howard # 1190 and ex-Councillor Keith Sansum # 1191 yet Councillor Roger Walkden is in complete denial #1195.
I am of the understanding that Dover District Council has been aware of this for over a year.
There is a shortage of play areas around that area, and it is of note that in the CGI did NOT feel the necessity to incorporate a play area in their Farthingloe development. Although they do expect children to live on that estate go to local schools - for which they do NOT propose to provide money for extra places - #1024, #1177 and #1184.
One cannot help but note that Paul aka Scottie (#1185) keeps banging the drum about what We - those who oppose the CGI development proposal - want to happen to WH if the proposal is rejected.
First is unlikely that the proposal will be rejected in its entirety as DDC have a lot riding on it - mainly the New Homes Bonus. However, if it is, it is likely to be resubmitted asking for a smaller hotel and more houses at Farthingloe.
Albeit, if DDC actually does recognise that the planning proposal is totally flawed and do reject it.
And the possible subsequent submission and the proposals fail at Appeal
Then perhaps, Paul, you and your supporters may do as I suggested in my postings of #1121 and # 1124 (agreed by Keith Sansum and Howard Sweeney agreed - #1122 and 1123)
And get onto to EH - I gave the e-mail addresses in posting #1124 - and get them to pull their finger out.
The future of NATIONAL ancient monument is equally as much in your hands, Paul, as it is in ours - I have had a go at EH ... have you?
Lorraine
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Lorraine - WHPS are constanly in contact with English Heritage, this is how we have achieved what we have for the last 10 or so years.
We have a very fine line to tread as it would be so easy for them to 'take back' the Drop Redoubt as we only borrow it from them and undo the hard work over the years. We can't barge in and upset people it needs to be tactically.
By doing our open weekend, walks, tours, etc it is proving the nationwide interest in the Heights and this is as good as, if not better, than some letters. Despite the weather this weekend we had about 1000 people up there which proved the interest
Been nice knowing you :)
