Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
‘Difficult decisions’ ahead on bypasses and 17,000 homes
Key vote on Local Plan looms, as fresh concerns raised over proposals
Draft proposals for 17,000 homes and two bypasses on either side of the city are set to be approved in the autumn.
Canterbury City Council’s new Local Plan will set out preferred plots of land across the district for housebuilding.
It will also put forward the recommended options for the controversial eastern and western bypasses.
Council leader Ben Fitter-harding says the Local Plan will need to “completely rethink the approach to transport” for Canterbury and admits there will have to be “difficult decisions” and “trade-offs”.
It comes as campaigners this week warn the proposed construction of the eastern bypass through Old Park and Chequer’s Wood could destroy a vital habitat for endangered birds.
Turtle doves - the UK’S fastest-declining bird species - and nightingales have recently been heard singing in the 85-acre woods.
Plans for the western bypass at Harbledown - potentially cutting through Duke’s Meadow - have sparked similar concerns, with hundreds turning out to protest the proposals last year.
The allocation of land for new housing across the district over the next 23 years is also likely to prove contentious.
Among the 271 sites being considered for development are huge plots around the University of Kent.
Proposals also include an area of farmland near Canterbury Rugby Club, where Quinn Estates hopes to build 2,000 new homes alongside the shell of a new city hospital.
Cllr Fitter-harding said: “It’s inevitable any discussion about the district’s future gets drawn into a debate that is solely focused on potential house numbers and what could be lost through the building of roads and infrastructure. But a Local Plan is about so much more than that.
“If we get it right, it is about enabling homes to be built for people that will desperately need them - our children and grandchildren - it is about creating jobs, building hospitals and schools, the long-lasting protection of open space, boosting biodiversity and maximising carbon neutrality.
“It will also work to protect the district’s rich and diverse history and heritage and our World Heritage Sites, cut congestion, boost air quality and help people to walk, cycle and make the most of public transport. To do the latter, it needs to completely rethink the approach to transport for the city of Canterbury.
“None of this is easy and there are always difficult decisions, controversial proposals and trade-offs to get the very best for our district.
“But, in our Local Plan Options consultation last year, we laid bare the challenges we face for all to see and, thanks to local people, are now armed with a wealth of evidence that is being used to create the draft.”
Council officers are busy working on the draft plan, which councillors will be asked to approve in the autumn.
That decision will trigger a public consultation, before the final draft is presented to a planning inspector, who will examine it at a formal hearing.
The plan is complicated by the fact the council needs to make sure it protects the Stodmarsh Nature Reserve, as water quality issues have stalled housebuilding across the district.
Regarding the concerns raised over the eastern bypass, which would stretch from Sturry to the A2 at Bridge, Cllr Fitter-harding previously said the exact location is yet to be confirmed. But he also admitted the new road, if eventually approved, would likely cut through the Old Park.
About 30 members of the Friends of Old Park and Chequer’s Wood recently walked along the proposed bypass route.
They heard the “purring” of the turtle doves, which they say is a sign the birds are back in Canterbury after spending the winter in Africa.
Organiser William Rowlandson said: “The walk provided a great opportunity for people to see the precious nature of Old Park and Chequer’s Wood and to comprehend the scale of the destruction which the eastern bypass would cause. It is vitally important that we protect this rich, unique, and irreplaceable area, whose destruction cannot be mitigated.”