Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
Keep this fight going: the message is clear at LTC meeting at Shorne and Ashenbank
“This is not a done deal – the Lower Thames Crossing is hanging by a thread.”
Becca from Transport Action Network had travelled from Hampshire to join a range of campaigners for last week’s Woodland Trust walk at Shorne Woods Country Park and Ashenbank Wood near Gravesend.
Both sites (they comprise part of the same SSSI) are threatened by the proposed crossing, and those present on a swelteringly hot day (Wednesday, July 13) gained a first-hand look at what could be in store should Highways England’s largest road scheme come to be built.
“This is the biggest carbon-emitting scheme in the whole roads programme – it would bust the country’s carbon-reduction target,” Becca told the group.
More specifically, the road would effectively destroy what was described as the last green space between Medway and London – itself a damning indictment of how over-developed north-west Kent has become.
It is, of course, always good to talk and Tim Bell, county council ranger at the country park, said the original plans for the crossing would have “pulverised” the site but five years of discussion had gone a long way towards saving much of it.
The worst-case scenario would still result in the loss of 30 metres of the park’s woodland from the boundary fence, but if placement of utilities could be tackled, that loss could be cut to six metres.
Of course, factors such as noise pollution, nitrogen deposition, micro-climate changes and impact on heritage can’t be ignored however much the road, should it be built, carves into the wood. (It was pointed out that HE was only evaluating noise pollution 300 metres into the site… as if it stops at 301 metres!).
With the A2 chopping a thunderous wall of noise and fumes between the country park and Ashenbank, it would be disingenuous to suggest such matters aren’t already evident, but it was perhaps surprising how much the noise faded once we were deeper inside the woods.
Happily, it made it easier to listen and learn about a place so rich in natural, historical and archaeological interest. We heard about dormice mitigation areas, the brown long-eared bats using an air-raid shelter as a winter roost, the Bronze Age barrow (a Scheduled Ancient Monument) at Ashenbank, the £1 million funding for tree surveys, the fact that any veteran trees existed here at all was near-miraculous given the demands of, for example, the war effort and the nearby cement industry… and very much more.
Sometimes the source of the threats came as a surprise – for example the diversion of National Cycle Route 177 through Ashenbank would necessitate the path on which we were walking being resurfaced and potentially widened – an intrusive and damaging process that the trust wanted assessed by Highways England itself… if only the agency’s officials would come and look for themselves.
We learnt that veteran trees don’t have legal protection (the trust is working on this) and that, even though the whole site is subject to a Tree Preservation Order, that won’t be enough to save them from a project such as the LTC.
Hot tip: you need to find a rare bug or insect on your veteran tree to increase its chances of protection.
The Lower Thames Crossing is a huge scheme – its costing of £8.2 billion eats up more than half Highways England’s capital enhancement budget of £14.7 billion – but its poor functional case and the environmental damage it would inflict on both Kent and Essex means the respective CPRE branches, together with so many other groups, oppose it.
The team at Shorne Woods Country Park have already won some handsome concessions in the planning process, but, as others pointed out on Wednesday, HE needs to keep the county council onside. Other organisations and campaigners might not find it so easy.
We’ll leave the final word to ranger Tim Bell: “Be assertive – you need detailed answers.” Or, in other words, don’t take no for an answer!
- For more on the Lower Thames Crossing, see here
Monday, July 18, 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
