Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
Appreciating the silent skies? Then join this survey asking how we're affected by noise pollution
It cannot have escaped the notice of many in the county that everything during the Covid-19 lockdown is so very much quieter – the constant drone (or roar) of aircraft overhead and road traffic all around us is a fraction of what it was.
While we’re fully understanding of the misery caused by the situation, the lockdown has resulted in an environment less afflicted by noise pollution than we have known for years.
Earlier this year, CPRE’s Network Aviation Group released a report showing the need for better mapping of aircraft noise and more research to understand the impact of aircraft noise on health.
The group are now undertaking an Aviation Noise Attitudes Survey to find out more about the impact of aircraft noise across the country and how it affects people on a day-to-day basis.
“During the lockdown many people have observed nature returning to towns and villages, from foxes to pheasants,” said Kia Trainor, director of CPRE Sussex.
“The sound of birdsong is becoming more familiar than the sound of traffic and aircraft noise. We think that this is a golden opportunity for people to consider the impact of noise on their lives”.
Sally Pavey, a CPRE Sussex trustee, added: “Although communities face uncertainty about what the future holds, the government are not delaying plans for the modernisation of airspace.
“This could see many rural areas impacted for the very first time by aircraft noise as policy seeks to limit the number of people impacted, so avoiding built-up areas.
“The process is well under way, with the Civil Aviation Authority conducting the CAP 1887 consultation on the masterplan of airspace modernisation during lockdown.”
The new survey is open until Monday, June 1, and open to everyone – you can take part by clicking here
Friday, April 24, 2020
- A number of important documents have yet to emerge. For example, a rigorous transport plan and a finalised air-quality assessment. The latter is critical given that allocations at Teynham will feed extra traffic into AQMAs.
- There seems to be no coherent plan for infrastructure delivery – a key component of the plan given the allocations being proposed near the already crowded Junction 7.
- There seems to have been little or no cooperation with neighbouring boroughs or even parish councils within Swale itself.
The removal of a second consultation might have been understandable if this final version of the plan were similar to that being talked about at the beginning of the consultation process. It is, however, radically different in the following ways:
- There has been a major shift in the balance of housing allocations, away from the west of the borough over to the east, especially around the historic town of Faversham. This is a move that raises many concerns.
- A new large allocation, with accompanying A2 bypass, has appeared around Teynham and Lynsted, to which we are objecting.
- Housing allocations in the AONB around Neames Forstal that were judged “unsuitable” by the council’s own officers have now appeared as part of the housing numbers.
- Most of the housing allocations being proposed are on greenfield sites, many of them on Grade 1 agricultural land – a point to which we are strongly objecting.
Concerns about the rush to submit the plan
The haste with which the plan is being prepared is especially worrying given the concentration of housing in Faversham. If the town is to take a large amount of new housing, it is imperative that the policies concerning the area are carefully worked out to preserve, as far as possible, the unique nature of the town. The rush to submit the plan is likely to prove detrimental.
As Swale does not have a five-year land housing supply, it is open to speculative development proposals, many of which would run counter to the ideas contained in the current plan. Some are already appearing. This is a common situation, and one that, doubtless, is a reason behind Swale’s haste.
Our overriding fear, however, is that this emphasis on haste is ultimately going to prove counterproductive. This is because it is our view that the plan, in its current form, is unlikely to pass independent examination. We are urging Swale to listen to and act upon the comments being made about the plan and to return the plan to the council with appropriate modifications before submitting it to the Secretary of State.
Essentially, this means treating the current consultation not as the final one but as the ‘lost’ second consultation.
The consultation ends on Friday 30 April and we strongly urge residents to make their opinions known if they have not already done so.
Further information
