Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
Meet Margaret, one of our volunteers
Celebrating her 85th birthday today (6th June), Margaret Micklewright has been a volunteer with CPRE Kent since around 1999.
She volunteered to help members meet each other socially and started a varied and imaginative programme of outings. She has run well over 100 different trips to places as varied as Chartham Paper Mill, Saltwood castle, the EU headquarters in Brussels, Tenterden Vineyard and Dungeness Power Station.
Margaret’s personal favourite outing was a visit to the sewers beneath Brighton – stretching a quarter of a mile underneath the sea below the pier and viewing brickwork untouched since 1860. She remembers the group emerging from the tunnels in their hard hats into a nearby park to the surprise of passers-by.
Her career is a varied one including time working for a consultant anaesthetist on drug trials, admin work for Ted Heath and exporting spares for textile machinery all over the world. A lifelong http://phentermine-med.com countryside and heritage champion, she volunteered for the National Trust for 12 years before coming to the CPRE Kent in 1999.
Margaret also volunteers at the College of Arms where she is secratary to the Windsor Herald of Arms in Ordinary. Always busy, she says she will not slow down until she’s at least 100.
“Margaret really is an inspiration to us,” said CPRE Kent Chairman Christine Drury. “She is a great example of someone whose volunteering really enriches the charity. We can concentrate on our campaigning work and Margaret adds to the social and fun side which members enjoy so much.”
Margaret has many more outings planned – find out more here and see her full programme here. She gains her inspiration from chatting to people and word of mouth. Plus she organises the annual Christmas lunch – held in January each year.
- 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
