DOWNSWOOD
PARISH COUNCIL
Clerk: Mrs Teresa Irving
7 Firs Close, Greenacres,
Aylesford, Kent ME20 7LH
Tel: 01622 717466
Email: teresa.irving@btinternet.com
Spatial Policy Team
Maidstone Borough Council
Maidstone House
King Street
Maidstone ME15 6JQ
28 September 2012.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Core Strategy Strategic Site Allocations Response
It is assumed that DPC is not expert enough to comment on the sites allocated to the north west of Maidstone.
The sites allocated covered by this document are Langley Park, land north of Sutton Road, land south of
Bicknor Wood and Newham Park.
SS2a: Langley Park
Additional access/egress is required directly onto Brishing Road for convenience to schools and rail stations,
lessening traffic onto Sutton Road.
Once the improvements suggested by the Integrated Transport Plan are already in place, development at
Langley Park will still have a detrimental impact on residents of Downswood and Town Centre businesses.
The Draft Integrated Transport Policy acknowledges that improving one area often impacts in a negative way
on a neighbour and admits traffic flows will increase. By pushing for a lorry ban along Willington Street
(width restriction would suffice) this impact could be negated as this would improve air quality conditions for
those living in the Parish.
SS2b : Land North of Sutton Road
Development here, it is acknowledged, would require an improvement to Gore Court Road to allow for 2way traffic. At present, this country lane mostly allows a single car, although is passable by 2 with care.
Although it is accepted that improvements to the Sutton Road/Willington Street junction need to be made,
along with improvements to Gore Court Road, it is assumed all traffic will take this route out of the
development. In reality, it is to be expected that some traffic will find its way northbound along Gore Court
Road then Church Road, through the Parish of Downswood and out either via busy Willington Street or the
more residential Spot Lane. Neither is acceptable and development at this point should only have access
directly onto Sutton Road. This will ensure that traffic ‘behaves’ the way the Draft Integrated Transport
Policy believes it will and therefore this document meets the target it sets itself.
SS2c: Land North of Bicknor Wood
Although it is noted that this land is more rural and therefore less suitable for development that that provided
at SS2b, this land potentially gives more problems and more detriment to those living in Downswood. With
the land being an ‘island’ with no direct link onto an existing arterial route and larger, more ‘family oriented’
housing, it is likely that more car journeys will be created, even just to reach local bus stops! Those buying
large houses to the north of this site are potentially likely to own more than one car and have more reliance
on them, therefore increasing the probability of taking the perceived ‘short cut’ via the unsuitable Church
Road and onto Downswood. With the land being insular, it is impossible for development to take place here
without a link road being built somewhere onto the existing road network and it is unlikely that a road
through Bicknor Wood onto the Sutton Road would be deemed acceptable as the only point of access/egress.
www.downswoodpc.org
Downswood would therefore have to suffer increased traffic flow through the Parish with no benefit or
acceptance of this fact. Downswood would therefore object to site SS2c being released for allocation without
the only access/egress being through site SS2b and direct onto Sutton Road only.
Strategic Employment Location at M20 J8
Land is already available at Park Wood for all the uses stated in the Core Strategy document (industry and
warehousing) and is not being used. Land is also available at J7 for the same uses (premier office
development) and again, lies disused. There is, quite clearly, therefore no demand for additional space and
with the improvements from the Draft Integrated Transport Policy in place, access to Park Wood would be
improved thus making the site more attractive. With employment so near to housing, it may be that some of
MBC’s worst fears about traffic congestion are relieved – this seems a far better use of land!
Junction 8 may be one of the few non-developed junctions along the motorway, but this does not mean it is
suitable. It provides residents with an alternative access to the M20 when J7 is congested, thus improving air
quality in this area and helping traffic flow. This role should not be underplayed as it is important for
Maidstone residents to have equal access to the road which was built as ‘Maidstone’s Bypass’ compared to
longer distance road users.
The potential for flooding in this area is also important to consider. Development creates ‘run off’ which
needs to be dealt with efficiently – sand from the construction of the CTRL is still providing a threat to
wildlife in the River Len today and as a result of the increased height of the river bed, local roads are often
flooded. For Downswood specifically, this means one of our three access/egress points being closed –
sometimes even causing problems at two out of three points. Further development higher up river will only
exacerbate this, yet this is not considered when development is considered as Downswood can sometimes be
deemed too far away to be affected – the sand proves otherwise!
The spectre of the proposed KIG development raises its head and whilst all the arguments against that
development still hold true today, MBC is proposing an ‘undeveloped landscape buffer’ at Woodcut Farm
alongside land which had been earmarked for the KIG development. It is unlikely this will be acceptable to
the people of Maidstone as it appears undeveloped land is simply land waiting to be developed and DPC fear
that, in time, the whole area will be developed. It appears that even designations such as AONB and SSSI
hold little sway for MBC who are keen to develop as much as possible.
The land east of M20 J8 is a steep hilly area, unsuitable for much development, whilst the land to the south is
an existing brownfield area. Development here cannot therefore be objected to, but provision can be made to
ensure that future development only occurs on the existing site and does not intrude further into the
countryside.
Newnham Park
It is acknowledged that this site will be visible from the AONB of the North Downs, yet is still included for
consideration. Access, it is stated, will be from the Bearsted Road roundabout, with emergency vehicles and
buses being able to access directly from the A249 Sittingbourne Road. This is unenforceable and vehicles
will be able to access the site themselves without the need to travel along the newly-dual-carriageway
Bearsted Road. As per development at J8, there is little call for office developments or warehousing in the
area and existing facilities should be promoted.
Further retail development at Newnham Park would be detrimental to economy of Maidstone's Town Centre
and therefore should NOT be permitted.
In conclusion
Downswood would suffer limited detriment as a result of building Langley Park, but enormously if the other
two sites were to be released for development, particularly the land north of Bicknor Wood. However, this
would be more limited if access to/from the sites was purely onto Sutton Road itself, with no link to Gore
Court Road. This would help the Borough Council achieve the objectives of its proposed Integrated
Transport Policy and ensure traffic movements were controlled in our newly congested future.
Yours faithfullly,
Teresa Irving
Clerk to Downswood Parish Council.