Proposed Modifications to the Thanet Local Plan

Document Section Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034 [View all comments on this section]
Comment ID 339
Respondent C Solly [View all comments by this respondent]
Response Date 27 Jan 2020
Comment

Response by policy shown in “italics” and my comments in “bold” shown below:

 “Land is allocated for up to 1,600 new dwellings with an approximate average density of 35 dwellings per hectare (net) at Birchington.”

This part of policy understands that mixed development may incur a mixture of housing and I can accept this.

I do contend with the level of housing (1600 dwellings) and the sites selection process, and will refer back to my previous representations on this.

  “Proposals will be judged and permitted only in accordance with masterplan for the whole site which should include:”

I would ensure that any development irrespective of size will need to submit the masterplan in those applications, as hybrid and piecemeal applications are not acceptable to bite off land on part of the sites allocation.

 “1) a minimum of 12.8 ha of open space;”

The change is supported

 “2) a fully serviced area of 2.05 ha (to be provided at the cost of the developer) to accommodate a new two-form entry primary school and its construction in a location and in a form agreed with the County Council;”

The county council should consult with the Parish council (and neighbourhood plan group) and local residents as part of this process

 “3) a range of community facilities in accordance with Policy SP12, including small scale convenience retail provision to serve the day-to-day needs of the residents;’

The change is supported

 “4) provision for the expansion of medical services at the Birchington Medical Centre to cater for the additional needs created by the development;’

The CCG should also decide if recruitment of staff is able to be met for the demands of the development.

 ‘5) linkages to new and existing public transport infrastructure, including bus and rail services;’

The change is supported

‘6) a new link road to serve the development and extending from Minnis Road and the A28, and A28 to Manston Road (including new junctions on A28/Minnis Road and Acol Hill/ Manston Road;’

 This accepted but I do question the suitability of the Shottendane junction in its current state as this can be a place for car accidents, and will only magnify this problem with more traffic. These roads should be programmed early in the development schedule.

“7) access on to Park Lane and a footway connection to the entire frontage to connect to the existing footway in Park Lane near to the access with Brunswick Road and”

 The change is supported

 “8) a proportionate contribution to necessary off-site highway improvements in accordance with Policy SP47”

Ensuring that item 6 above is funded first and phased early in the development schedule.

 “Masterplanning will be informed by and address the following:

 measures to preserve the listed buildings Gore End Barn and Upper Gore End Farmhouse and their setting ,including the setting of QuexPark;”

 This is welcomed and supported

 “2) measures to integrate the development within the landscape to enable a soft edge between the site and the open countryside;”

 This is welcomed and supported

 “3) pre-design archaeological evaluation;”

 This is welcomed and supported

 “4) noise mitigation for any development near the northern edge of the site which is adjacent to the railway line”

 This is welcomed and supported

 “5) The capacity of any utility services and infrastructure and any need (and provision of) improved or additional infrastructure (as may be advised or reasonably required by service providers);”

 The change is supported

 “All development proposals must be planned and implemented in a coordinated manner and accompanied by an infrastructure delivery and phasing plan. “

 As stated earlier the infrastructure plan could be clearer on when this will be phased in line with the plan and policy. I am keen to ensure that the delivery of road infrastructure to be delivered as a early as possible

 “Proposals will be accompanied by a Transport Assessment which shall:

“1) assess the impact of development on the local road network”

In particular Traffic modeling and assessment to ensure reasonable road conditions at :

Essex Gardens

Minnis Road + Bridge Alpha Road and junctions

Station Road and roundabout

Park Lane Junction/Canterbury Road Junction

Essex Gardens/Mill Row/Park Avenue to Canterbury Road Junction Station Approach Bridge

 

“2) identify measures to promote multi-modal access, including footway and cycleway connections and an extended bus service accessible to the residential development and rail linkages”

 And Rail Parking need, which could be expanded at the station. This would encourage better use of rail services

 Other comments:

 Surface water may need some local assessment as there is some information which may indicate surface water areas, which appear not to be in the evidence

Map of SP14 and around

https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/long-term-flood-risk/map

(***Map 2 attached sits here in original rep***)

And at my location:

 https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/long-term-flood-risk/risk?address=10006110 4616

(***Map 3 attached sits here in original rep)

https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/long-term-flood-risk/risk?address=100061104616

 

Attachments