Skip to content

Back into the light: the memorial to CPRE Kent champion Cyril Chettoe

Elementary Admin
By Elementary Admin &
28th December 2021

Cyril Chettoe was chairman of the Campaign for the Preservation of Rural Kent, a forerunner to CPRE Kent

One of the Kent countryside’s greatest champions was honoured in the summer through the unveiling of a new memorial.
Cyril Chettoe was chairman of the Campaign for the Preservation of Rural Kent – a forerunner to CPRE Kent – and a memorial in the form of a tablet on a stone with trees planted around it had been placed at Hubbards Hill on the Greensand Way overlooking Weald village after his death in 1963.
With the passing of the years, the stone became almost hidden by surrounding undergrowth and the Sevenoaks committee took on the task of creating a more permanent memorial.
With the help of Weald Parish Council, undergrowth was cleared, a new plaque was erected and on Wednesday, July 7, a ceremony took place where John Wotton, chairman of CPRE Kent, unveiled it.
Nigel Britten, chairman of Sevenoaks CPRE, described how the right solution had been found, for which he thanked Dr Susan Pittman, the committee’s secretary, who had designed the memorial. He then introduced the CPRE Kent chairman, who paid warm tribute to Cyril:
“He was a dedicated supporter of CPRE, chaired the Kent branch and is credited with its revival. Whether he was one of our founding members in 1929, when he was in his mid-30s, is not recorded in our archives, but if he was living in Kent at the time it is quite likely that he was.
“He evidently had broad historical and environmental interests, as the list of his activities on the memorial demonstrates, reflecting the range of considerations we have to bear in mind when we seek to protect the countryside.
“These include landscape and natural beauty, archaeology, the historic built environment, care for our country towns and rural villages, the natural environment and biodiversity, housing, infrastructure, sustainable transport and combatting climate change.
“Cyril Chettoe concerned himself with many of these issues, through the organisations he supported, in particular CPRE Kent.
“If he is to be credited with our revival under his active chairmanship, then we indeed have cause to be grateful and I hope that, if he were to see CPRE Kent at work now, he would be gratified and feel that his efforts were worthwhile.”
Cyril was a busy man and, aside from being heavily involved in CPRK, was also founder of the Sevenoaks and District Civic Society (later to become the Sevenoaks Society) and chairman from 1945 until he died. David Green, the present chairman, was present at the ceremony and also paid tribute.
A civil engineer by trade, with special talents in bridge-building, Cyril had worked for both the Ministry of Transport and Ministry of Health, while he was involved in the routeing of the Sevenoaks bypass, which you might know better as the A21.
It was perhaps in the 1950s that his contribution to planning in his hometown of Sevenoaks was most marked as he battled to ensure protection of its most historically and architecturally valuable buildings.
While that town has special reason to celebrate Cyril Chettoe and his work, his love of Kent – its countryside and built environment alike – gives us all reason to be grateful.

The new memorial highlights the wide and varied interests of Cyril Chettoe

The original plaque was showing signs of wear

CPRE Kent chairman John Wotton, left, and Sevenoaks CPRE chairman Nigel Britten both spoke at the ceremony

Tuesday, December 28, 2021


  • 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