Don’t concrete over Garden of England Rough justice
WHY is the Government allowing huge developments in rural areas? It appears that the need for new homes has given developers and councils carte blanche to build in areas that once would not have been granted planning approval. Yes, we need more housing, but it should be in small developments in towns, which cause less environmental impact and don’t alter the dynamics of local communities. My village in the South Kent Downs is in an area of outstanding natural beauty. However, a huge development of 12,000 houses, with more planned over the next few years, is in the final stages of planning approval. The houses in this new town will be for people commuting from a new railway station to London, not affordable homes for local people. The devastating effect on residents and tourists has not been considered. Parish councils were not consulted and 98 per cent of residents oppose the plans. It will cause an environmental disaster with pollution not only from land clearance and building, but emissions from an extra 30,000 cars. It will decimate wildlife habitat, create water shortages and increase congestion on the single road to the coast. Though the developers have promised to build schools and medical centres, these will be for new residents. The development will have a disastrous effect on overstretched local hospitals. And the final insult: the local airfield has been bought up to be built over with even more houses. This airfield played a major role during the world wars. It was from there that Amy Johnson and Douglas Bader made pioneering flights. It is also a green buffer zone between the village and industrial area. How can we stop this disaster before it’s too late?
DENISE JORGENSEN, Lympne, Kent.