TTC are commissioning an independent review of recreational facilities across the whole town , This would take 3 months so would dovetail with the  Tent1 consultation period. He also said that the Leisure Centre management  were looking at the impact that 250 (this is the figure Mayor Wade  quoted) new homes would have on the  services they may need to provide.

STAG has many concerns about Tent1, its sustainability, its impact on the town and its infrastructure as well  as the lack of any  obvious benefits to the existing community.

We  submitted a number of questions( in blue) in advance of the meeting and these were answered ( in red ) at the meeting as follows :

 1) With regard to the Tent1 development, I would like updated clarification as to the current status of phase ‘ B ‘, and the percentage likelihood of it happening.If, as I suspect, it may not proceed, can the town council confirm that any amenity land they sell off as part of the phase ‘A ‘ build, ie the wildflower meadow, will be replaced within the phase ‘A ‘ build area by a similar size plot and not fob us off with promises that ‘ it will go into phase ‘B’.

Finally, can the council clarify for me if the wildflower meadow is the ONLY plot of land that they own or are guardians of, within the planned  area of the whole of the Tent1 build ( A+B)

Answer: The Steering Group were looking into what would be the case if the Phase B land did not materialise as part of the development. The phase  B  landowner was being approached to see if they would top up Phase A with a slice of Phase B land for recreational use even if the  rest of phase B did not go ahead. On the  Wildflower Meadow the Mayor said that it would be replaced ‘within reason’ He was reminded  from the  floor that the Wildflower Meadow was an existing  facility so it had to be replaced  as well as, not instead of  additional recreational facilities needed by the new residents. ABC’s Head of Planning , Richard Alderton , said that ABC had space standards for the provision  recreational space in new developments so the scheme had to show how these standards would be met.  A resident reminded the  Mayor  that  purchasing amenity land to replace the Wildflower Meadow either in Phase B or elsewhere could be expensive so that the windfall which the Mayor referred to as a benefit to the town resulting from the sale of TTC land could well be  used up just replacing the Wildflower Meadow. The Mayor confirmed that  TTC did not own any other blocks of land in Tent1 except the Wildflower Meadow.

2) Dear Councillors,

I would like to ask the following question at the AGM on Monday;

Is it true that in the light of Tent 1 there will be no other large scale housing developments in Tenterden e.g. such as Hales Place?

Answer Any planning applications would be considered in the context of Tenterden as a whole.  Richard Alderton said that if a large  scale site was not included in the revised Local Plan ( previously known as the Core Strategy) then it could not go ahead.

 3) How will the infrastructure needs (eg sewerage, water supply, GP facilities etc )  for the many hundreds of  new residents  arising from the  proposed  Tent1 development be met and funded?  What measures have  the Town Council taken in the last year to progress these issues and obtain the required assurances from those required to provide the  necessary infrastructure?

 When will Ashford Borough Council’s full report ( including, presumably,  the facilitator’s report) of the first Tent1 design workshop which took place  4 months ago be available for the public to see? What is the  cause of the delay?

: Mayor said that the planning application has to show how infrastructure needs were going to be met. Specifically referring toi the GPs surgery he said that there had been a meeting with the GPs in charge who had said that they would aspire to extend the surgery facilities on the existing site.

The report  from the  Design Workshop facilitator had been delayed. ABC had received it recently but had returned it to the  author as it had been inadequate. TTC had produced its own summary of the  proceedings and initial conclusions shortly after the  workshop had taken [place and this was available on TTC’s website, 

4) At last year’ Town Meeting it was stated that the development:Tent 1 would be of benefit to the Town. Now we understand that any money which accrues from the development is not “ring-fenced” for Tenterden but will go instead into the coffers of Ashford Borough Council . It this true? If not how much is coming to Tenterden?  

Richard Alderton said that any contributionsfrom the developers arising from  Tent1 would be spent in Tenterden.

Minutes of the whole of the Annual Town Meeting can now be found on the TTC website  http://www.tenterden.gov.uk/  under the section ‘ Agenda and Minutes’

Wednesday 6th March, 7:00 pm

Venue: Tenterden Town Hall

Details: There will be a Public Meeting about the future of car parking in Tenterden at 7pm on Wednesday 6 March in the Assembly Room at the Town Hall. Ashford Borough Council officers will inform residents and businesses what the current plan is for parking in the town and how the Tent1 housing development will affect that. The public meeting will be chaired by Tenterden Mayor Robin Wade

It is not surprising that there seems to be no mention of the promised but non-specific benefits to the town and its current residents which the development will, allegedly, bring. There is also plenty of vagueness about the timing of further steps in the process, particularly the dissemination of information and consultation with the public. The figure of 250 homes in Phase A features in the minutes along with concerns expressed by  Roy Isworth, Save Tenterden Action Group’s (STAG) representative on the Steering Group, about the high density proposals which were being worked up at the December design workshop. This is  rather different from the 100 to 150 homes mentioned both in print and in public over the past couple of years  by some of Tenterden’s councillors on Ashford Borough Council.

 The planning of the development is now reaching a critical stage – it is not too early  to expess any views you have to  the Town Council and/or your elected representatives on Ashford Borough Council. You do not have to wait until the  formal public consultation phase – whenever that might be – as you can comment again when the plans are more specific

Reproduced with kind permission of the Kentish Express.

I have seen the workshop report on the TTC website and wondered whether the sentence regarding the number of community volunteers attending might be unintentionally misleading?

It says ” This involved over 70 invited representatives from local community and interest groups, as well as our elected ward, borough and county councillors, plus relevant local government specialists covering aspects such as schooling, highways, parking etc. The full list of attendees is available as a PDF “.

Looking at the list of attendees and from the spread of people attending I have counted only 22 or so people who are not involved with either TTC, ABC, KCC, developers, government agencies etc. Anyone reading the report but not going to the trouble of looking at the detailed list might gain the impression that there were 70 reps from community and interest groups, which was not the case. We were, in fact, largely outnumbered by the non interest/ community group attendees.

I didn’t have the chance to complete my feedback form at the end of the event or to stay to see George’s final offering because of struggling with a cold but I will be completing it in the next few days and forwarding it to Welbeck and ABC . The two things that worried me more than anything else was the apparent certainty from many of those ‘in the know’ that Phase B was a done deal ( the indication that the Wildflower Meadow ‘compensatory land’ would be at the southern edge of Phase B is another example of this) and the density of housing proposed for Phase A right down to the southern boundary. There was a definite push to squeeze as many dwellings in as possible throughout the site. I appreciate that these are early days in the process but I do hope that the Town Council and Borough Councillors (the reason why I am copying this to Mike Bennett as he is my ward councillor) will continue to represent the interests of the current residents even if it means reining in the ambitions of the developers.

Yours sincerely

Ann Achow

Morning Ann, thanks for this. Yes, I do take your point that the way I wrote it is very slightly misleading, I’ll correct it before the newsletter goes to press and put the updated version on our website to make it clear that ‘over 70’ was the total of attendees, not just the local element.

Regarding your second point, yes, to some extent I do share your concern and it will be interesting to see the first iteration of the detailed plan, and the extent to which this encroaches on Phase B. However I’m fairly relaxed about it at this very early stage because I’m confident that the core strategy review will overtake things.

Kind regards 

Robin

Hello Robin,

Two concerns / observations I should like to raise with you, following the 2 day workshop, are that of 1)House density and ( for me anyway ), 2) The ambiguity surrounding phase ‘B’.

1) At previous meetings and particularly at the two public sessions held at the Town Hall, it was stressed that the actual number of homes built would be a figure that came out of the master planning and not a fixed number that the developer would cram onto the site. However all I heard was the figure of 300 being mentioned from within the groups in which I was working and that certainly seemed to be the figure around which the site would be planned.

2) The role the Phase ‘B’ site plays in all of this is vital and is confusing me somewhat. Do we assume it will be developed whilst planning phase ‘A’ or do we assume that it will not be developed. The big concern I have over this , is that any of the land consuming issues there are, allotments, green spaces, playing field, replacement wild flower meadow land etc ,were fobbed off as ‘ this could go onto phase B’, which would leave nothing of this type in phase A , so conveniently providing the opportunity for greater density housing.

However, the impression has always been given, both by ABC and our Town councillors that the original figure was far too high and would be reduced to the 200 -250 figure and that the review of the core strategy would be most likely to conclude that the new projected housing requirements would be far lower, so negating the need for phase B. Richard Alderton certainly gave this impression at the two public sessions.

This review, I understand, will not now be completed until 2015, long after the assumed planning approval for phase A has been granted.

So I guess you can see my concern, — phase A approved with maximum density housing and minimal ‘green’ areas, then suddenly phase B is taken out of the equation and nowhere for the above mentioned facilities to go.’ Oops, sorry about that’ I hear them say

I would appreciate your comments.

Regards

David.

Hi David,

Thanks for this. I have to say I share all your concerns. But I know that if we raise them now they will just say wait until we see the first draft of the plan. Rest assured that if the proposals don’t meet our requirements and expectations we will object in the strongest terms. As landowner controlling the most important access we are in a strong position to insist on changes at the appropriate time.

Kind regards

Robin

TENT 1 MASTER PLANNING WORKSHOP

AN EXHIBITION OF THE OUTCOMES OF THE PRELIMINARY TENT 1 WORKSHOP WILL BE ON DISPLAY AT TENTERDEN LEISURE CENTRE (RECREATION GROUND ROAD) FROM 6:30pm UNTIL 8:30pm ON TUESDAY 11TH DECEMBER 2012.

THE FEEDBACK OF THE PUBLIC WILL BE RECORDED AND WILL BE USED TO INFORM THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS.

For a list of the invited participants and other TENT1 information, please visit http://www.tenterden.gov.uk and click on TENT 1

This is just a gentle reminder …

 Please don’t forget to obtain your tickets for our ‘planning debate’ to be held on Friday 30^th November !

( 7:30 pm at The Camden Centre, Market Square, Royal Victoria Place, Royal Tunbridge Wells, TN1 2SW )

  Speaking for the Government will be the Rt Hon Greg Clark, MP for Tunbridge Wells, Minister for Cities, and Financial Secretary to the Treasury

Speaking for our countryside will be Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive for the Campaign to Protect Rural England

 Our guests adopted opposing positions during the development of the new National Planning Policy Framework, and this debate will include further discussion about its implementation and how the NPPF fits together with other Government policy, such as the Localism Agenda.  It promises to be an interesting, informative, and possibly exciting evening.

There is a nominal charge of £5.00 for tickets, which can be purchased through the following website:  http://ukplanning.eventbrite.co.uk/  or by calling us on 01233 714544 .  As a registered charity, we must cover our costs for hosting the event. However we have made the price of the ticket as low as we can to ensure that as many people as possible can attend.

 Supporters of STAG and  general readers of this website might wonder why we, an organisation opposed to the TENT1 development, are taking part in a steering group intended to take forward the masterplanning process. We thought long and hard about our position before accepting the invitation, recognising that in spite of strong opposition to TENT1 at various public meetings both councils are intent on proceeding to the  next stage – the masterplanning.  Roy Isworth, along will the other Steering group members, was asked at the meeting to state their organisation’s aspirations  for TENT1. Recorded in the minutes are his comments where he stated that “he was implacably opposed to 500 new homes and it appeared that there was outline consent for this. He hoped that the Master Planning would significantly reduce that number and that the appropriate infrastructure would be put in place.” We  feel that this is the best vehicle in which to represent the concerns you, our supporters, have raised, especially with regard to Water, Traffic and other infrastructure issues and ensure these are properly addressed.

 At the July 2012  public presentations and in various Town and Borough Council statements and documents much emphasis was given by councillors and planning officials on the need for a high design quality of any development, stating that the figure of 300 homes in Phase A  was indicative only and not a target. We have all heard  the  high percentage quoted (30%) of affordable housing which will be provided, the recognition of the need for appropriate infrastructure to support any development and the  benefits, as yet unspecified, which should ensue for the general community.  Residents have also been promised full  involvement and consultation in the masterplanning process.

 By attending the Steering Group and design workshop (provisionally proposed for the second week of next month – further details awaited) STAG will participate actively in the process to try achieve the best result  and to remind  key players,  councillors, officials and developers that they must deliver on the promises that have been made. 

We will continue to provide updates and news  on this website so keep  tuned in. If you have any comments please contact us  using the contact us option on this site.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/36049

http://www.whosehomeisit.co.uk/
Dear group,
The new planning policy (NPPF or National Policy Planning Framework),
has some serious flaws. Also, the “Localism” act does not appear to mean
localism.

Here in Skipton, three recent appeals all went against our local
district council. In part, this was because local opinion is given no
weight in planning matters. In part, we were judged against a target
that was too high when set, and should now no longer apply (the RSS).

We need to force a bit more democracy into the process, because despite
the nod towards “localism”, the game is currently rigged.

With this in mind, we have launched an epetition
(http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/36049 [1] ) to secure a
debate in parliament to change planning policy. We will not get enough
signatures from our small town to do this, but if all similar groups
join in, anything becomes possible. There must be hundreds of groups
like ours with these issues. At present, we are concentrating on
geographic spread, with the intent to pump up the local volume as the
next step.

If you agree, please sign the petition, and pass it on using all means
to hand. Also, if you have not already done so, write to your MP
advising that you expect his support.

We now have a site at www.whosehomeisit.co.uk [2] to cross reference
groups and documents across England.

Anticipating your consent, I will be adding a link to your site. If you
do not want this, please let me know.
Thank you, and all the best,

David Walsh

Links:
——
[1] http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/36049
[2] http://www.whosehomeisit.co.uk/

You have until the 31st October 2012, when the consultation period ends, to do so.

The questions and concerns detailed below came from the floor at the public meetings held in the Town Hall Assembly Room and/or from STAG members at a pre meeting held with TTC including Mayor Wade, Cllr Clokie (ABC) and Mr R Alderton, Head of planning at Ashford Borough Council . A video of the Friday meeting, including the presentations and question and answer session is available to view on Tenterden Town Council’s website. The account below summarises some of the questions raised . Please note that it is not a verbatim account but it is produced to give the gist of the questions posed and the answers provided.

It is clear that much will ride on the masterplan process including the ‘enquiry by design’ workshop. Residents and community groups will need to take an active role to ensure that the views of the developers, landowners and councillors are balanced by those of ordinary residents and community groups.

Q. What is the definition of affordable housing?

A. Affordable housing makes up 35% of any development site where there are more than 14 homes planned. 20% of the total number of homes have to be rented at a maximum of 70% of the open market rental for that property. The homes are normally owned by a housing association. 15% of the homes are available on a ‘staircase to ownership’ arrangement ie part rental and part beoing bought. This means that ,eventually, only 20% of the homers on the site will be available as affordable. The 70% figure is ABC’s current policy although government policy for affordable housing is that a maximum of 80% of market value can be levied.

Q Will the government’s ‘New Homes Bonus’ subsidy which ABC receive for each new home built in Tenterden be available to be spent in Tenterden?

A. Currently all new homes bonus monies received are used centrally by ABC towards the funding of the borough, not specifically Tenterden. No decision has yet been made about the general policy of transferring the funding for the benefit of the area where new homes are built.

Q. Borough councillors have been in print saying that their aim is to limit development to 25 to 30o houses a year. How will this be achieved?

A. This is an aspiration. It will depend on the phasing of the building as detailed in the masterplan. It may be more for the first couple of years.

Q If I bought the land and put in an application to build 475 houses could I be stopped?

A. Not necessarily but you would have to go through the masterplan process.

Q. Is the figure of 475 homes fixed?

A. No . The figures are indicative as the masterplan will determine a reasonable figure for how many will fit.

Q Who decides what is reasonable?

A This comes out of the masterplanning process for approval by ABC’s Planning Committee. bThe figure has to be defendable as it could be challenged at an appeal by the developers. The number of successful appeals is rising in line with government planning policy.

Q. How will the infrastructure needs be determined? What about traffic including recent and proposed developments affecting the A28 elsewhere, not just TENT1 , congestion on the High Street, parking, education and health facilities, water, sewerage, etc ?

A. This will come out of the masterplanning process. If the sewerage is currently at capacity the developer would have to pay to extend the sewerage facilities and bear the costs. Traffic modelling will determine the volume oif additional traffic which the A28 can take, particularly at junctions.

Q What about the impact on public sector facilities on a wider scale, for example the need for extra beds in local hospitals, the re-opening of Magistrates Courts etc?

A These are issues for central government , not issue for the town /borough councils.

Q Will the infrastructure enhancements eg more school places, a larger GP surgery be in place before the homes are ready for occupation or will the additional facilities lag behind the arrival fo the new residents?

A Unlikely

Q What about jobs for these new residents?

A No substantive answer was given.

Q What is the definition of sustainable development?

A It is hard to say but you will know it when you see it (!). The government’s National Planning Policy Framework’s 50+ pages are meant to define sustainable development. To be sustainable houses will have to use water wisely – grey water, water catchment from run off etc.

Q What about recent progress on water supply given the recent drought?

A Kent County Council’s recent water summit (26 June 2012) makes glum reading.

Q Why will Tenterden be different and avoid the planning mistakes made by ABC in the past?

A ABC have got better with more experience (!)

Q When is the Environmental Impact Report released?

A. At the planning application stage but environmental data will be available for the masterplanning.

Q Won’t residents and community groups be at a disadvantage at the workshop as they are not planning/development professionals?

A An independent facilitator(s) will run the workshop.

Q What benefits will there be for the current residents?

A This will come out of the masterplanning.It is for the workshop attendees to define what they want the developer(s) to provide in terms of community amenities and the developer(s) will deliver them (!).

Q What land does TTC own?

A The wildflower meadow to the rear of the Leisure centre. If this is used for development the developer would have toi provide an equivalent open space either in or near to the development site and cash compensation to the Town Council.

Q How do you become involved in the ‘enquiry by design’ workshop?

A ABC are responsible for arranging the workshops and will ask TTC to nominate people to be invited to attend. They will need to identify as broad a cross section of the community as possible including youth and other community groups, service providers,

Q Will other development in Tenterden (eg ‘windfalls’ be suspended whilst the development is going ahead or will there be far more than the usual oft quoted 25 to 30 per year.

A Other housing planning applications such as’windfalls’ will continue to be considered at the same time.

Welbeck Strategic Land LLP was formed in 1994 and has developed a particular expertise and reputation on strategic land development and created effective partnerships with landowners, local authorities and community groups.

Their presentation was videoed and can be viewed in full on the Tenterden Town Council website, http://www.tenterden.gov.uk/   This now includes the QA session that followed. .Excellent coverage of the meeting can also be viewed in this weeks Kentish Express.

The dates are

Friday July 20th at 3.00pm

Saturday July 21st at 10.00am

Reproduced with kind permission of the Kentish Express

I WONDER if Cllr Clokie would provide clarification of his letter (April 5) regardingthe proposed TENT1 housing development? He says “I do expect the master planning exercise to state the phasing of the new build and for Ashford to accept our view.”        Later on he mentions a “majority view put to the inquiry in public”. Whose view does he mean? His view? That of the town council, of Ashford Borough Council or of Tenterden residents? This is important as Cllr Clokie’s comments regardling the town council’s frequent public statements “that 25 to 30 houses a year was the number at which we should aim” have been contradicted by correspondence sent in the last two weeks from the town council in reply to letters from four residents.                                                      The town council confirmed that it is proceeding with the planning on the basis of the numbers and phasing in the current plan: 300 homes by 2016 and a further 175 by 2021.In addition it says that it is not waiting for the outcome of the borough council’s review of proposed housing numbers before proceeding further and that it is likely that some of the development will have been built before that review has finished.                                         If CIII Clokie has definite information to support his “informed wishful thinking” of a gently evolving estate of 25 to 30 homes a year, perhaps he would like to share it with Tenterden residents as it is not in line with the most recent information provided by the Town Council.

Ann Achow, Smallhythe Road, Tenterden

Reproduced by kind permission of the Kentish Express. Edition dated 19/04/2012

One, Gill Whittaker, asked at the annual town meeting: “What are the benefits for us? I have not heard anyone say what the benefits of a 475 house estate will be.”

Residents packed into the Town Hall assembly room for the meeting on Monday. Roy Isworth told councillors: “We all know this vast housing estate was imposed on us. You now have plenty of opportunity to put the brakes on this.” Mayor Cllr Phil Carley said the council supported the development but promised that residents would be listened to.

Full story, page 3

Reproduced with kind permission of the Kentish Express.

MOST of the people who live inTenterden do so because they choose to.They may have been brought up in the town, have moved here through work, retired here or just fallen in love with the place.

So we can understand the concerns at having 475 homes imposed by Ashford Council under the Tent1 scheme.The strength of feeling was evident at Monday’s annual town meeting where it was standing room only.The borough authority has said that as the next largest “settlement” outside of Ashford, Tenterden has to bear the brunt of the most new homes in the coming years.We hope this is not just big brother flexing his muscles and wanting to show little brother who is boss.

Tenterden is the jewel of the Weald but is also the jewel in AsMord’s crown and as such should not be tarnished.If the houses are a done deal, then it is imperative that the views of townspeople are heard. As a planning authority and owner of part of the development site, the town council has a delicate path to tread.It has promised to listen to residents. The town council must in turn be listened to by Ashford council, and so it goes on.

Localism is alive and well in Tenterden. Long may that continue.

Reproduced by kind permission of the Kentish Express

Annual Town Meeting 16 April 2012

Over 100 members of the public attended the 2012 Annual Town Meeting held in the Town Hall.

The proposed TENT 1 housing development for 475 new dwellings dominated the meeting.  The Council distributed a three page sheet about the  development – the first  detailed information provided by them on the subject in the past year. It was not surprising that the   development was the main subject for questions and comments from the floor, causing much animated discussion .

The councillors chose to ask the two representatives from their professional advisors, Batcheller Monkhouse, to field the many questions and comments from residents. Apparently, the Council had met beforehand and decided that this was the best course of action rather than answering questions themselves. When pressed to give an opinion the councillors relied heavily on the forthcoming Master planning process, saying that this would provide the answers to questions about, for example, the benefits to the town of this  massive development and what was meant by the term ‘ affordable housing’. It was clear that the Council had spent much time in the last year seeking the advice and views of their professional advisors without keeping residents informed or asking for their opinions.  In spite of advertising questions in advance of the meeting no efforts were made to identify those who had submitted questions or to answer them. In fact there was not enough time to answer all the questions from the floor.

Before moving on to other matters the Mayor promised a public meeting solely on the topic of the TENT1 development. If you would like to press the Council to arrange such a meeting as soon as possible so that you can have your views heard  you might like to write to the Council at Tenterden Town Hall or e mail townhall@tenterden.gov.uk

To read more about the meeting you can view the Kentish Express’ extensive coverage  on our latest news page. The Town Council’s draft minutes of the meeting are also available to view on their web pages.( www.tenterden.gov.uk )  agendas and minutes  section.