How planning by appeal cost Thanet one of its few remaining woodlands
This admittedly awful photograph shows what remains of one of Thanet’s last snippets of woodland.
With just 4.4 per cent tree canopy cover on the isle, Thanet is one of the least wooded districts in England – this was perhaps a contributory factor in the district council’s decision in August 2015 to refuse plans for 153 houses at Grade II-listed Westwood Lodge.
In explaining its decision, the council said: “The proposed development would result in a significant incursion of the built form into the Green Wedge, which would reduce the separation between settlements and result in a substantial loss of openness and established woodland habitat.”
In these days of ‘planning by appeal’, however, Westwood Cross Developments did indeed appeal the council’s decision and in February 2017 the Planning Inspectorate duly approved the Broadstairs scheme, which entailed the felling of 150 Category C sycamore trees.
The inspector said the council’s position was weakened by its lack of a five-year housing supply.
Turning to the Green Wedge – the council’s long-standing policy that aims to keep open countryside between the three main towns of Margate, Ramsgate and Broadstairs – the inspector said:
“Further loss of trees within the site, and the introduction of additional dwellings, would be partially visible. However, as the woodland visible along the northern and eastern site boundaries would be largely retained, its distinctive landscape qualities would not be prejudiced.”
The original developer Places For People Homes had pulled out of the scheme, but it was taken up by Rooksmead Residential working with L&G Modular Homes, which has been building the properties at an off-site factory before they’re moved to Thanet.
Property management company Love Living Homes subsequently launched the shared-ownership development, which includes two-, three- and four-bedroom properties.
The plans had included the planting of 450 trees, along with wildlife corridors, but it’s difficult to see how the natural environment has won out on this one.
Wednesday, June 29, 2022
- 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