Local plan
Cllr Pat Edwards presented a series of slides re the draft district local plan 2040. The strategy in the revision of the draft was to cut development sites where inappropriate and reduce the timescale of the plan from 2045 to 2040; bus passes not bypasses, bus-led, brownfield first - notably Wincheap, open spaces and tree strategies, more sports facilities, 20% biodiversity net gain in all large developments, enforcement with developers, four new primary and two new coastal secondary schools, links to the A2, one extra site north of Kent Uni. Cllr Keith Bothwell presented re climate change and said that the planned housing mix was based on real needs with an emphasis on affordable housing being mixed into all new developments, rental accommodation, first time buyers and our local housing list. There was a new sustainable design guide which developers had to follow with a focus on reducing energy and water use and reused materials. Cllr James Flanagan presented re the bus-led strategy with a focus on reliability, safety, access (inc electronic info), hopper buses around each town for the longer term, reduction in fossil fuel use. Park and bus was being considered for Whitstable. Re sites locally, there was a social housing site planned for Seasalter, Brooklands south of Chestfield with 1400 houses, a new primary school, an SEN school, retail and two slip roads onto the A299. Land south of the Thanet way had already received planning permission. Bodkin farm - the developers had already applied for planning permission for 250 houses, a retirement home, a new secondary school and access to the old Thanet Way. Cllr Edwards summarised the challenges - flying in the face of KCC’s car first strategy, persuading the Planning Inspector to consider alternatives to road building, the 20% biodiversity target (twice the national figure), proving the viability of development based on these principles in the face of developer opposition. She sought responses from those attending to the consultation on the plan which closes at 5pm on Monday 3rd June. There is a drop-in consultation session with officers on Weds April 24th at the Whitstable Umbrella Centre from 6 to 8pm.
Steve Bailey, Chair of Chestfield Parish Council responded. He was supportive of the plan overall, if done correctly. However, it will increase the population of the once sleepy village of Chestfield by 67%, making it closer to a town. The sewerage and other infrastructure was Victorian and Steve questioned whether these new developments had been factored into the planned upgrading of the Swalecliffe pumping station.
In the debate that followed, Cllrs explained that there was no council house building in the plan pre May 2023 so the new coalition was looking at how to buy sections of current developments for council housing and use brownfield urban sites for flats eg in Barton. In response to concern re sewage in our seas and rivers, Cllrs stated that planning requires sewage disposal on site in most places alongside rainwater recovery. Asked about employment, Cllrs stated that this was covered in the corporate plan. A member stated that we needed a local plan to avoid presumption in favour of unfettered development and urged others to simply state that we needed better drainage and disposal of human waste. Cllrs stated that, as things stood, developers are not chosen by the council but CCC were working on a viability assessment that would show the Planning Inspector that developers could still comply with the sustainable design guide and make a profit. A member questioned the population assumptions in the plan and stated that the newest ONS data meant that the plan overstated need sixfold. A Cllr stated that there was work being done to change this to revise the calculation downwards but this has to be agreed nationally. Regeneration of old, energy deficient, council housing stock was expensive and some needed rebuilding. CCC were bidding for funding for this regeneration. Again, this was a national problem requiring central government funding and local skills’ development.
Town Council
Cllrs Chris Cornell and Clare Turnbull explained the process so far of the Community Governance Review. They had broken Gorrell into two wards in response to the heat-mapping of the responses to see whether there was sufficient support for a smaller TC than our proposal of all Ct5. They were stymied by the lack of a referendum. Many respondents did not understand the benefits of a TC or the discounts available re the precept.
Stage two will be different to stage one. It will take eight weeks from just after the decision by Full Council on April 25th (April 29th to June 24th). CCC will go back to those who responded to stage one, receive input from local groups and other people commenting on the draft recommendations on the CCC website. Final recommendations based on this feedback and further deliberations by the working group (by July 22nd) will go to full council, finally, on October 17th.
Chris Stanley, Chair of the Ct5 Town Council group, said we were disappointed by the negative attitude of local Councillors since before the CGR. CCC had 27 parish and town councils in rural areas but none in the three main towns. We accepted that Seasalter, Swalecliffe and Chestfield did not want to be part of a TC but Gorrell and Tankerton had clearly stated they were in favour. The National Association of Local Councils, contrary to the assertion in the council report, stated that a TC for Gorrell and Tankerton would be large and viable with precept income of around £500,000 which would be hugely valuable for the town and the whole of Ct5. Members voiced their sadness that our local councillors had not championed local democracy. They were shocked at the comments in the local press and on social media.
A trustee criticised the negativity of the report’s recommendations in their assertion that a smaller TC would damage social cohesion and not be viable. Both were unfounded. He stated that the numbers signing the petition should have been included in the calculations of support for the proposal; rejecting the vexatious assertion that stage one showed that support had decreased. We know that many local people thought that signing the petition was all they needed to do to show they supported a town council.
Another questioned the view amongst some of the CCC GPC members that it would be inappropriate to consider a smaller TC than the whole of Ct5, as given in our proposal. This is quite wrong and worrying.
Another trustee asserted that it was untrue that all Ct5 residents had received the CCC leaflet. (This was later accepted by Cllr Chris Cornell.)
Members were asked to step up now to support the campaign for stage two to yield a smaller TC for Gorrell and Tankerton by offering their skills, time and financial help.
In response, Cllr Cornell stated that the petition numbers were not included because they did not consider it something that ‘could be validated’. The biggest problem was the lack of response and there were ‘established thresholds’. They could not produce something that would give us ‘parity with other Kent towns’. Everyone could now give their opinion in stage two including re ‘alternative solutions’ to the concerns behind the petition.
Chris Stanley stated that the consultation in stage one was poor. Leaflets had not been received in some areas, the meetings were not well advertised and were held at bad times. The officer at the GPC had stated that the response figures were good, contrary to Cllr Cornell’s assertion. There was no reason why stage one could not have recommended going forward with a TC for Gorrell and Tankerton.
David Hayward re traffic and active travel survey
The survey was made available to all those on CT5 PF full mailing list. 80 people responded, providing a total of 323 separate comments (8714 words) - this felt like a pleasing level of engagement. Whilst most words were written on issues concerning the need to improve aspects of public transport (1733 in 59 comments) most comments were actually made about the need to make it easier to walk in CT5 (66 comments and 1509 words). Many of the comments and words in response to improving ease of access for those with additional access needs related to 'walking' issues so, if these are added in with the specific question about ease of walking, then this confirmed it as the even greater perceived priority need for action.
Overall the main concerns on initial analysis are:
Pedestrian safety and accessibility - including the physical state and sizes of pavements
Traffic congestion and its environmental impacts - including the sheer number of vehicles coming into and through the town centre
Traffic speeds and enforcement
Public transport in general and buses in particular - including the lack of routes within CT5
Cycling infrastructure improvements and creating a safer cycling environment for all
Problems caused by myriad seemingly uncoordinated roadworks
The Group will next look at the full responses and bring a more detailed analysis of needs and possible actions to a future Full CT5 PF meeting for consideration.
Mark Thomson re: Whitstable Walk proposal (summary received after the meeting as there was insufficient time)
Proposal
For a few hours to close through traffic at Gorrell car park junction with Cromwell Road and at Oxford Street junction with Nelson Road thereby diverting traffic along Cromwell Road. This creates a car free walk space from the Harbour entrance (west), Starvation Point, Harbour Street, Sea Street, High Street and Oxford Street. This would allow the centre of the Town to be free of traffic and the space to be enjoyed by walkers and wheelchair users. Advance notification would be given to residents and visitors, emergency services, bus routes and delivery vehicles. The adjoining junctions would be marshalled by volunteers with street barriers. We would encourage residents and visitors to arrive on foot, by bike or on public transport. Traders would be encouraged to spread into the road space where people could enjoy refreshments in the open. Schools, community groups could also be invited to use the space.
The Whitstable Walk would reflect our intentions to put pedestrians and wheelchair users at the forefront when considering our town’s traffic and transport challenges and act as a taste of what might be possible in the future. By itself it does not resolve Whitstable’s problems but could act as a catalyst for new thinking. If the Walk is successful then it could be repeated – as is the case in a number of seaside/tourist towns in the UK.
What has happened so far?
Whitstable Carnival will close this same stretch of roadway for their procession on 3 August between 5pm and 7.30pm. I asked the Carnival Committee whether they would support an earlier close of this stretch from 2pm to allow three hours of our Whitstable Walk proposal to enjoy the street space before moving people back onto pavements in time for the Carnival parade arriving. The Carnival Committee were supportive and their Chair, David Hayward and I met with the Events Officer, CCC to obtain permission to proceed. We received support but needed to convince CCC that we met a number of criteria. We would need to provide evidence of a satisfactory number of trained marshals and first aiders. We would need to complete a full risk assessment - meeting obligatory health and safety regulations. There would be issues for public liability insurance and if food and drink were going to be consumed in the open space then licensing and food safety/hygiene requirements must be met. The proposal would be subject to the Safety Advisory Group to ensure emergency services, transport services were content. There would also be a charge levied – depending on the number of attendees. This information and associated guarantees would need to be completed within a short time scale.
While the Carnival Committee had a number of years of experience of completing the administrative requirements we in our CT5 Focus group did not. The Carnival Committee remained supportive of the Whitstable Walk intentions but they would not be in a position to extend their remit to cover the Walk closures given their own busy schedule in preparing for Carnival. They would be happy to try again next year with more notifation.
Next steps
Given the limited resources of our Focus Group we decided at our 18 March meeting that we were not in a position to organise the Whitstable Walk on 3 August. That said, there still remained support and enthusiasm for a car-free walk to happen – particularly in the light of government and CCC plans to encourage active travel in our communities. At our meeting Neil Baker (KCC) referred to the KCC Active Travel team as a source of expertise and would arrange contact to take the Focus Group forward in planning another attempt.
Although we are disappointed not to go ahead on 3 August we have benefitted from the process and learned lessons for the future. To be successful we would need :-
• A dedicated working group able to meet up frequently
• Consultation with traders and community groups
• People skilled in advertising/ communicating the proposal
• Early submission of documentation to meet CCC’s requirements
• A number of volunteer marshals and guides to staff the junction closures
• Some funds to meet CCC’s requirements.
We shall keep the proposal on our Focus Group agenda and return to the main CT5 group with further proposals.
Don Sibley for the Eco Group and Wild About Whitstable.
Don was pleased that there was so much in the local plan re climate change and biodiversity.
WAW 2024 will take place from 12th - 18th August. We had an amazing programme of activities and an Eco Fair at St John’s Methodist, Argyle Rd on Saturday 17th.
We had been knocked-back in two bids for funding but were working on a crowd-funding proposal which was for a minimal amount of £1,300 initially.
Gordon Vincent for Whitstable Maritime stated his support for the Forum and that he would keep us appraised re their key activities.
DONM Wednesday 19th June
Comments