RULE No.1: PRIORITISE
DON'T BE 'INTIMIDATED' BY THE VOLUME AND LENGTH OF DOCUMENTS
Not All Documents are Equal
Remember the key issues:-
* Unsuitability of Lynsted Lane for increased traffic congestion
* "Prematurity"
- The advanced state of "Bearing Fruits" Borough Plan cannot be ignored by Swale Borough Council - this is Government Policy
* Pollution Effects are Cumulative: our health is already going to be damaged by ALL the developments identified in the Draft Borough Plan - an opportunistic development only adds to our problems. The Essex Developers
already confirm this is true.
RULE No.2: DO NOT WRITE JUST ONCE!
KEEP YOUR FINGER NEAR THAT "SEND" BUTTON!
Every change (however small) made by Developers
means the 'start gun' is fired again by the SBC Planning Department
who will not automatically make a link with your earlier communications.
Daft but true
WHY THIS PAGE?
- Community: Get involved: Our community lives along both sides of the A2 - the north side falls in Teynham Parish Council (TPC); the south falls in Lynsted Parish Council (LPC). The two Parish Councils have a poor record on working together.
- Working together: We must take responsibility ourselves to share information, our understanding and our opinions so we can let Lynsted and Teynham Parish Councillors, our Borough Councillors and M.P.s know what we want and what we don't want. Every letter counts.
- Our Health: Pollution Monitoring Order show another serious threat: February 2016 saw Swale Borough Council (SBC) issue an Order for continuous monitoring along this part of the A2 because harmful pollution (Nitrogen Dioxide - NO2) has already broken 'safe' limits and that other pollutants are dangerously high. See full assessment.
- Developers: Opportunistic development is no substitute for proper planning and consultation by SBC. Every decision to develop green-field sites on or near the A2 between Ospringe and Sittingbourne increases traffic density, snarls up an already congested stretch of the A2 and is guilty of breaching Natonal Planning Policy on "prematurity".
ARGUMENTS BASED ON PLANNING POLICY, HEALTH & SAFETY
The developers have provided some 32 documents alongside their application for Outline Planning approval. It is easy to be overwhelmed and bogged down by the volume and technical nature of many of those documents.
- Prematurity. The current proposal falls squarely under national policy on "prematurity" which defends refusal of developments where the Planning Authority has policies in advanced state of preparedness. Parish Councils and SBC need to be reminded! Prematurity summarised in a letter (it will be sent again in response to this latest development plan!)
- 'Single-track': Lynsted Lane is effectively a 'single-track' as it approaches the A2. Wholly unsuitable for any increases in traffic. Blockages can cause further tailbacks onto the A2 and increase pollution southwards along the built-up part of Lynsted Lane.. Local traffic already diverts along Cambridge Lane/Cellar Hill (which is even more narrow all along its length) and Claxfield Lane (which is full of blind bends and is very narrow).
- Increased Complexity makes for more danger: travelling along this part of the A2 is becoming more difficult and complicated for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists as more traffic joins it from new inputs:
- The Fowler Welch site - heavy vehicles;
- Brickearth extraction from Teynham/Barrow Green - heavy vehicles;
- Current Plans for Frognall Lane development - residential/commuter and heavy vehicles;
- Current Plans for Station Road development - residential, commuter and delivery vehicles;
- Current Plans for Bapchild - residential, commuter and delivery vehicles; and
- Current Plans for Sittingbourne that flow onto the A2, East of the buit-up centre of the town - residential, commuter and delivery vehicles;
- Increasing kerb-side parking on residential and business stretches of the A2 narrows parts to one-lane throughout the day.
- Canyon Effect: When traffic stops and starts it creates and traps more concentrated pollution at ground level for residents, visitors, shoppers and workers - this is called the canyon effect";
- Pedestrians, wheel-chairs, buggies: more difficult for pedestrians to keep track of what is happening when crossing and having to walk into this main road to avoid cars parked on the pavement;
- Pavements used by cyclists who fear riding along the A2;
- Infrastructure: the new community (if allowed) will have to cross the main road to reach shops, library, station, dentist, GPs, etc;
- Reduced train services: there are fewer fast trains from Teynham;
- Employment: there are no sizeable employers nearby; so all developments will lead to more commuters/traffic, which will also take their spending power away from the community around the A2;
- Primary Education: Teynham primary school is now full; Lynsted/Norton village primary school is heavily over-subscribed.
- Medical care is very stretched. Curiously, the two GP practices (both in Teynham) sit in different Local Area Health Authorities (the split runs along Station Road) - who knew!?
What Next?
LATEST NEWS:
- "Bearing Fruit Borough Plan" (to 2031): The 6-week Public Consultation period ended on Monday, 8 August. You can read the submissions using the button but you cannot add comments any longer ...
WHAT IS "IN IT" FOR SWALE BOROUGH COUNCIL?
- Each new home-owning person or family brings another contribution to Council Tax and some additional spending in the community (less if they commute out of the local community).
- Then there is something called the "New Homes Bonus" - this is paid by central government to Swale Borough Council. Every new home brings with it a 'bonus' equal to the Council Tax paid for six years. In theory, this money goes towards all those promised 'extras' such as schools, GP surgeries, and so on. I found this article that helps make sense of whether this 'bonus' works for us or against us.
IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS - DON'T RELAX!
- A letter (sent 9th May) to Councillors, MP and Parish Councils along the A2 concerning the doubtful decision to allow large housing development in Newington. The advice from officials suggesting that AQMA is not relevant! Read the letter here.
I have since been told that letter has been put into the "objections" that will be considered by SBC when they call in the decision to allow the Pond Farm development to proceed. We await the Planning Inspector's views as there may be implications for us and our pollution problems.. - Notification of a key Councillor's meeting inside Swale with the latest Officers' recommendations on where housing should be permitted.
“Extraordinary, Local Development Framework Panel - Thursday, 19th May, 2016. 7.00pm”- The briefing pack (670 pages, 41Mb file - large because it contains a large number of maps and illustrations) can be viewed from SBC's own website.
- SBC also provides a Summary for Councillors (106 pages). You can download and view the (much smaller) PDF here.
- Parish Councils have been invited to a briefing meeting on Thursday 16th June.
Keep an eye on this page!
On the face of it, these meetings are encouraging but .... always a 'but' ....
- this meeting may change things,
- then there is the public consultation later this year,
- then the proposals need to clear through the Inspector,
- then Councillors have to get the result bedded down and published.
So, let's not hold our breath - keep vigilant.
29th February Parish Council Presentation. Our report on what more than 20 residents heard at the Lynsted Parish Council meeting that invited Essex developers (Scott Property Group) wanting to build on fields next to houses on the south side of the A2. We also heard about the dangerous levels of pollution that we are already experienceing. Community Report.
11th April Public Exhibitions in Teynham Community Hall (1pm to 4pm) and Belle Friday Centre (5.30pm to 8pm).
- The plot of land: The whole stretch of land between Lynsted Lane and Claxfield Lane has been offered by the landowners for up to 390 homes. The portion of initial interest to Scott Property Group is shown in their leaflet - view aerial picture here.
- First sketch map: Shown at the Parish Council Meeting but not included in their leaflet-drop. They may amend it (with 'sweeteners') in light of the hostility from local community residents - view the plan (version 1) - picture or PDF.
- Swale Borough Council's new policy restriction: breach of harmful pollution along the A2/Teynham-Lynsted due to existing congestion - see the Order.
Our Community - why "Greenstreet"?
Until just after World War 1, the whole residential and commercial community on both sides of London Road was officially recognised as "Greenstreet" because this was the main population between Faversham and Sittingbourne. It was the Post Office (Faversham) who wanted to identify the Parishes separately. Since then, there has been a lack of clear identity for our Community in the business of our two Parish Councils. It is worrying that Swale Borough Council has identified the new proposals with "Teynham" although it falls entirely in Lynsted Parish.
DOCUMENTS/CORRESPONDENCE
Perry Court (Faversham) - Approved - 1st April 2016
Perry Court (Faversham) greenfield site is agreed for development because SBC fear legal challenges that they cannot afford to defend even if policy guidance steers local authorities away from using highest grade agricultural land (greenfield) and ignores fears about pollution - ignoring the "cumulative impact" on existing polluted areas like Teynham/Lynsted. As Councillor Simmons put it after this frustrating planning meeting: "
-
Kent online report
- Councillor Simmons's speech - 31st March Planning Committee Public Meeting
1st April resident's letter arguing that this proposal is getting a bit ahead of itself - so called "prematurity".
Points raised
- This plot of land has been regularly rejected in the Five Year Plans in recent years.
Reasons given by SBC:
(a) linear pattern of development across the rural parish of Lynsted makes the proposal inappropriate; direct access to open aspects of Lynsted Parish valued by residents;
(b) amenity value to local residents (both sides of A2);
(c) national planning policy argues against the use of land of highest quality of agricultural land because of the importance of food production;
(d) national planning policy argues against use of green-field sites and SBC Policy argues that greenfield sites should not be used outside the economic regeneration plans between Sittingbourne and Sheppey; - Opportunism: SBC is currently reviewing its 5-Year Plan in response to the Planning Inspector's decision that SBC needs to increase home numbers further. Developers are already trying to take advantage of this review period to raid profitable greenfield and high quality agricultural sites - See Perry Court (Faversham), Swanstree Avenue (Sittingbourne), Bapchild and others;
- New policy constraint: the pollution hazards are already at harmful levels and legally obliges SBC to take measures to reduce pollution. This fact argues against all development proposals between Ospringe and Sittingbourne should be put 'on hold'. National reviews show that national measures to encourage cleaner engines is not having the impact they anticipated. Pollution levels have stabilised rather than dropping; more traffic=more pollution.
Full document can be read here (PDF)
PARISH COUNCIL MEETING on 29th February 2016
London Road and Lynsted Lane under threat from Dangerous Pollution levels and 120 new homes
Over 20 Lynsted Parishioners attended Lynsted with Kingsdown Parish Council’s meeting on Monday 29th February to hear about two related and important issues that affect all of us along the A2 and Lynsted Lane.
An extremely unprofessional presentation was given by Essex developers, Scott Properties, who want to build 120 houses on the field lying immediately behind the existing homes along the south of London Road (ME9 9QH), in Lynsted Parish. Vehicular access for approximately 300 cars (that is an estimated 600+ extra vehicle movements each day: commuting, shopping, school-runs, deliveries, bin collections, etc) will flow into Lynsted Lane.
Unfortunately for them the first line of their presentation was known not to be true! Their claim that Swale Borough Council (SBC) had offered “positive support” for this proposal misrepresents the case. Their presentation was not helped by using the wrong postcode in their submission to SBC, putting the site clearly on the Teynham/Frognal Lane side of London Road. This schoolboy error led them to give a presentation to Teynham Parish Council on the plans!
The risk to residents is that SBC does lump Parish Council areas together to weaken arguments against development encroaching further south of the A2. So, their paperwork lumps this part of Lynsted Parish into "Teynham".
They went on to misrepresent SBC’s position by claiming SBC did not have the required “5 year plan”. This is misleading. SBC are currently reviewing their draft 5-year plan as required by Government Planning Inspectors. The facts are:
- SBC has been told to add 3,000 homes to their existing plans for more than 12,000 homes by 2031 (that includes 200+ each year of the five years of SBC’s plan).
- To do this, SBC are looking again at all previously rejected parcels of land that landowners have offered for potential development. Ours was one of those rejects.
- That long list of previously rejected land across Swale could, in theory, yield an additional 17,500 homes! So, it is not obvious that valuable top-quality agricultural land in a rural location is a “favoured” site for SBC!
- SBC has its own policies: (a) support for an economic development plan, and (b) non-use of green-field sites outside their economic priority areas connected with Sittingbourne and Sheppey. It makes sense to bring large housing developments to places where people work and where there are services already in place or that can be expanded most economically.
- SBC has decided not to seek development around Faversham or in the rural villages and the countryside of Swale.
- SBC adopted the Lynsted Parish Design Statement in 2002 as a planning document, based on several democratic processes involving the whole Parish. That document included the importance of preserving the “sensitive edge” to the immediate south of existing households on the A2. (The Design Statement is available to download here, or through the Planning Pages of Swale Borough Council)
The developers didn’t know that the land (even after brick-earth extraction) has been classified by central government (DEFRA 2005) as “excellent” agricultural land. The most productive and most flexible agricultural land.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF - 2012) states “Local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality.” This land has for many years been rejected by SBC for good reasons.
It was clear the developers had not done their homework:
- They seemed not to be aware of the narrowness and lack of pavements on Lynsted Lane towards the A2, nor did they know there is no way of widening it.
- They didn’t know that the north end of Lynsted Lane is already congested, dangerous, and effectively a single carriageway with limited line of sight.
- They didn’t know that pedestrian access along London Road was dangerous for people with young children with pushchairs etc because pavements are often blocked or narrowed by parked cars.
- They didn’t know that primary school places are oversubscribed locally and the existing level of traffic level and parking outside of the school is dangerous.
- They didn’t know we had no significant employment locally.
- They didn’t know that London Road and the bottom of Lynsted Lane are now in an Air Quality Management area after measurements showed dangerous and illegal levels of pollution (Nitrogen dioxide in particular).
- They didn’t know that Teynham Railway Station was not served by the fast link into London.
- They didn’t know about the recent fatalities on London Road.
When asked directly “what would be the benefits to the local community?” the developers fell silent and then a voice from the floor was heard to say - “that would be none then!” They did offer up a footpath going south from London Road to the development. We had to explain the path already existed and they were planning to build over most of it!
If this plan goes ahead, it would set a precedent and may look attractive to the landowners of the parcel of land along the back of the rest of the houses off the A2 leading onto Claxfield Lane (which is currently said to be suitable for 157 more homes) and possibly turning Claxfield Lane into a major junction.
The current “draft” site plan is on the Swale planning portal or as a PDF file on this site or as an image here.
The developers have promised a community consultation open day prior to any plans being formally submitted. If you want to be kept in touch please email sos@lynsted.com.
The Second Topic – Pollution on London Road
Cllr David Simmonds (SBC Cabinet Member for the Environment and Rural Affairs) reported that SBC had made an Order (February 2016) to establish an Air Quality Management Area (No.5) along London Road where it passes through Lynsted/Teynham Parishes. The “crunch” for everyone living, working, shopping and travelling along London Road is that pollution concentrations have already hit dangerous levels of nitrogen-dioxide poisoning.
 |
 |
Today's pollution is completely different to the 'smogs' or 'peasoupers' of the 1950s and earlier. The harmful gases today are invisible and odourless, the particles are several times smaller that the width of one of your hairs. Most of this type of pollution along the A2 comes from diesel engines of lorries and vans. Many vehicles come from Europe and do not meet the most modern emission standards. So, pollution levels are rising with trade flows and will not reduce any time soon, especially with the recently approved doubling of capacity of the Fowler Welch coldstore.
Transport is responsible for 80% of all NOx pollution on UK road links outside London. This is due to both the significant growth in vehicle numbers over the last ten years and the emissions standards not delivering the expected reductions under real world driving conditions (rather than laboratory conditions). [Source: DEFRA]
Mortality Figures: An estimate of an effect on mortality equivalent to 23,500 deaths annually in the UK has been made on the basis of NO2 concentrations. Many of the sources of NOx are also sources of particulate matter (PM). The impact of exposure to small particulate matter pollution (PM2.5) is estimated to have an effect on mortality equivalent to nearly 29,000 deaths in the UK. There may be overlap between these two estimates of mortality, but the combined impact of these two pollutants is a significant challenge to public health. Recommended limits for exposure have been set taking account of guidelines by the World Health Organisation.
The smallest particles pass through membranes and into our blood and lung tissues.
We are not alone. Previous Orders have already been made along the A2 at Ospringe, two sites in Sittingbourne, and Newington. Swale has now to explore strategies (if they can) to reduce harmful pollution all along the residential areas facing onto the A2 where traffic accelerates, decelerates and stops.
Pollution is concentrated:-
- where smooth flow of traffic is interrupted (e.g. at junctions, bus-stops, parking narrowing the road, pedestrians trying to cross the A2, Age Concern minibus drop-off, general weight of heavy traffic and so on);
- where the prevailing wind crosses two lines of buildings as happens in the built-up parts along our community that straddles the A2. This is called the “canyon effect”, where stagnant and polluting fumes and particulates are trapped between and trapped next to the buildings sitting on both sides of the busy road. The fresh air simply passes over the top of the buildings an leaves pedestrians in the soup of poisonous levels of pollutants.
When buying or renting their properties on the A2, residents said they accepted the traffic (including noise and light pollution) in front of their properties – but that was offset by the sanctuary given by their gardens and the ‘lung’ of fresh air coming from the south-west (the prevailing wind direction). Significant building on those fields would further pollute residents with no respite.
Cllr Simmons agreed to look at adding pollution measurement points all along the built-up area of London Road.
All efforts have so far failed to improve our air quality. In fact, all types of traffic have increased in recent years as more lorries and cars join the A2 – so, pollution levels are rising (recently measured and confirmed at Ospringe, which shares our traffic and the same problems).
National Planning Policy Framework (2012) says: “In preparing plans to meet development needs, the aim should be to minimise pollution and other adverse effects on the local and natural environment. Plans should allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework.”
The pollution will affect residents, shoppers, visitors, cyclists, pedestrians and car users. We already face worsening conditions when the Fowler Welch development opens its extension and doubles its flow of lorries (the worst and most dangerous polluters). If SBC allows any more housing developments between Faversham and Sittingbourne we will be polluted even further! Without the long promised southern relief road, new traffic can only go east or west along the A2 – there is no escape.
Where does this leave us?
- SBC and developers need regularly to be reminded that there are better sites to be found from the list of previously rejected parcels of land that could theoretically support 17,500 – when only 3,000 more are needed across the whole of Swale up to 2031!
- It is far too premature for Swale to look at new development sites in already polluted and endangered communities along London Road. SBC has many more suitable sites that meet their own plans for economic regeneration. For example, if Swanstree (Sittingbourne) went forward, that would meet nearly HALF the increased target for the whole of the next five-years! If the Stones Farm planning proposal (Bapchild) went through, these two proposals would satisfy the need for the whole of the next five years – but both those sites face their own problems and both those sets of problems are shared by everyone along the A2 between Sittingbourne, Lynsted/Teynham & Ospringe. So, while these two alternatives are not ideal, they do illustrate that opportunism of land-owners and developers are no substitute for a planned approach. Swale Borough Council are in the process of updating their five-year Plan.
- There are also many more modest sites in the list, of a scale suited to local builders in and around Sittingbourne and Sheppey (and Faversham).
This is not the only part of Lynsted Parish that is under threat!
If you want to know more, or would like some info into how to make your views known to Swale Borough Council, go to www.lynsted.com for further details. If you would like to be kept up to date with issues affecting our Parish, email sos@lynsted.com.