Public Transport

click

The Council still has not produced a Transport Strategy for the district. This is particularly worrying given the scale of new building that the Council is proposing. [Draft Local Plan 1.36]

Both the City Council and County Council will work together through the planning process to facilitate the use of sustainable transport by:

• looking to locate development near existing transport hubs
• requiring facilities for walking, cycling and public transport and
• ensuring mixed-use developments where housing and employment are located in close proximity to encourage shorter commuting journeys.
• [Draft Local Plan 1.38]

The major development sites proposed for Herne Bay will be dependent on car transport – they are nowhere near "existing transport hubs". The Council has also said nothing about the number of jobs that will be created on Herne Bay's new housing estates and has produced no the evidence that they will be delivered.

Congestion & Traffic

click

"In contrast to Whitstable, Herne Bay does not suffer from high levels of congestion. Here the challenge is to revitalise the town centre and reduce the need for residents to leave the town for services, leisure or retail opportunities by making the centre a pleasant and attractive environment for shoppers and visitors." [Draft Local Plan 5.8]

This fails to take into account the Council's plan to add thousands of homes around Herne Bay. If we did all came to shop in the town centre instead of going to Canterbury and elsewhere, congestion would be massive and there would be a gross under-provision of parking.

Herne relief road will be through Strode Farm and an improved Bullockstone Road. [Draft Local Plan 5.52]

We do not believe that Bullockstone Road can cope with this as well as the addition of 190 new homes.

"New development sites allocated in Herne Bay, Sturry, Broad Oak and Hersden will be required to fund a Sturry by-pass that avoids the level crossing by providing a new road bridge including a bus lane over the railway line. New development sites allocated in Herne Bay, Sturry, Broad Oak and Hersden will be required to fund a Sturry by-pass that avoids the level crossing by providing a new road bridge including a bus lane over the railway line." [Draft Local Plan 5.53]

So, we need housing here in Herne Bay to fund the Sturry crossing. There is no mention of the need to deal with our existing transport problems. There are no plans for improved rail for Herne Bay; no plans for a better bus service; and no mention of a change in parking policy to encourage people to shop in Herne Bay.

Open Spaces

click

To implement the Council's vision for the area, there will need to be a significant increase above the historic level of development in the area, both housing and employment space. There will also need to be a significant additional provision of open space of various types, proportionate to the level of other new development. [Draft Local Plan 1.51]

The housing estates proposed for Herne Bay eat up open space, they do not produce it.

There is not enough amenity green space provision now in Reculver, Heron and West Bay wards. A much bigger Herne Bay population will make this worse. The Council recognises that we don't have enough playing fields or allotments now. [Draft Local Plan 11.30]

"Everyone should have access to a space where children can play within 300 metres of their home (this includes amenity open space)." [Draft Local Plan 11.32]

This is not being achieved everywhere in Herne Bay now.

"Historically, some development has occurred outside the urban areas, that has led to the gradual erosion of the open countryside and coalescence between built up areas. The City Council is concerned that this gradual coalescence between existing built up areas not only harms the character of the open countryside, but is having an adverse impact on the setting and special character of villages." [Draft Local Plan 11.53]

The four biggest housing development sites of the five being proposed join Herne Bay to Herne village. In the east, Herne Bay will go south from the sea, through Hillborough, Broomfield and Hunters Forstal to Herne. In the west the town will stretch south from Hampton, through Greenhill to Herne.

Greenfield Sites

click

"However, public support for development is conditional. Local people expressed concerns about the loss of greenfield land, traffic congestion and the impact on public services; and there was also an expressed desire that higher levels of development should deliver tangible benefits to local people in terms of affordable housing and economic benefits, and providing the opportunity for young people and families to remain in their local area. It is important that the Local Plan, and other public policy interventions, seek to address these issues as far as possible." [Draft Local Plan 1.20]

Canterbury Council knows that people do not want to build on greenfield sites. However, all the major new sites proposed for Herne Bay are greenfield land.

Schools

click

"…new housing accommodation should be provided alongside other social and physical infrastructure, to ensure that existing infrastructure capacity is not exceeded and made worse by new development. Integral to encouraging balanced and sustainable communities are measures to provide access to public transport, education, health and other public services, measures to prevent crime, leisure and recreation and a strong environment that will aid sense of place and community." [Draft Local Plan 2.43]

It is well-known locally that we do not have enough secondary school places in Herne Bay. The Plan is for many more people to live here, but there is no new secondary school proposed for us. This can only make the current shortfall of local school places worse. We're also worried that this big population increase cannot be served by just two new doctor's surgeries.

"…The City Council has cooperated with Kent County Council in respect of the impact of proposed new development in the Plan on the need for new or improved school provision in the district, and some of that provision is made as part of the strategic allocations in the Plan." [Draft Local Plan 3.63]

Note that word "some". The Council knows that the rash of new housing estates that it is proposing for this town will exacerbate our current shortfall in school places in the town.

"The Council also believes that there is a strong case to be made for grammar school provision at the coast." [Draft Local Plan 3.66]

However, the Plan does not make that case and there is no land set aside anywhere to build a new secondary school. Nor is there any commitment from Kent Council to fund a new secondary school. This statement is pure pie in the sky.

Shopping

click

50,000 m² new "comparison shopping" retail space is set aside for Canterbury and 3,250 m² for Whitstable. "Comparison shopping" includes clothing; household goods; and other purchases where people will wander about and look at alternatives before buying. It does not include food shopping (convenience shopping). There is to be no new "comparison shopping" for Herne Bay even though our population is set to soar. This suggests we are all expected to spend our money in Canterbury. [Draft Local Plan 1.53]

It is proposed that there will be 15,000 m² of new employment land at Strode Farm and 33,000 m² at Altira. Other Herne Bay employment sites "identified and protected" are at Eddington (8.2ha), Altira (1.6ha) and Metric Site (0.2ha). The Council will not allow retail businesses on these sites, which suggests an end to the Sainsbury's proposal for Altira.  [Draft Local Plan 3.36]

The Council wants to protect Canterbury's pre-eminence as a retail centre. [Draft Local Plan 4.6]

"…the district centres (Herne Bay and Whitstable) have a complementary role as part of the established retail hierarchy, serving the local population. They ensure a sustainable focus and pattern for development and their position within the retail hierarchy will continue to ensure they have opportunities to enhance and strengthen their role. The distinctive characteristics of each centre will be promoted, and there is clearly scope within both centres for making improvements to the public realm and shopping environment." [Draft Local Plan 4.7]

What this means is that the retail centre is Canterbury. The plan remains for Herne Bay people to shop in Canterbury and boost the City's coffers. Our local shopping offer is to be lower key, local shopping only. 

We want housing AND jobs

click

"…Recent research conducted by IPSOS MORI (2012) found that local residents overwhelmingly wanted the council to help create new employment opportunities and support business development." [Draft Local Plan 3.18]

"…The survey [MORI 20120] also reinforced the importance of local economic growth for local people. When asked about economic issues, the majority (69%) considered there to be insufficient employment opportunities in the area while a higher level (85%) said more should be done to help businesses set up in the area. The research also found many local people (68%) would support the building of new homes if it helped to create jobs by attracting people and businesses to the area." [Draft Local Plan 3.28]

What residents said to the Council is that we want jobs and that we'll support housing if it creates jobs. What we're getting in the Plan is just housing and no strategy for creating jobs. 

No economic strategy for jobs

click

In drawing up local plans, local planning authorities should: 

• set out a clear economic vision and strategy for their area which positively and proactively encourage sustainable economic growth; 
• set criteria, or identify strategic sites, for local and inward investment to match the strategy and to meet anticipated needs over the plan period; 
• support existing business sectors, taking account of whether they are expanding or contracting and, where possible, identify and plan for new or emerging sectors likely to locate in their area. Policies should be flexible enough to accommodate needs not anticipated in the plan and to allow a rapid response to changes in economic circumstances; 
• plan positively for the location, promotion and expansion of clusters or networks of knowledge driven, creative or high technology industries; 
• identify priority areas for economic regeneration, infrastructure provision and environmental enhancement; and facilitate flexible working practices such as the integration of residential and commercial uses within the same unit.
• [Draft Local Plan 3.5]

We can find no economic plan in the Local Plan that sets out how the Council will attract enough employers to Herne Bay to soak up thousands more job-seekers. We already have above average unemployment in Heron ward. The explosion in housing planned for Herne Bay can only make it worse.

"…Generally the private sector and key growth sectors are under-represented in the local economy, which instead continues to rely upon a few consumption driven, low-value added sectors and the publicly funded sector." [Draft Local Plan 3.14]

We have low value jobs locally, and not enough employment in growth sectors. We can see nothing in this Plan that sets out how the Council will resolve this for our town. It looks as if the Council's plan is to have people live near Herne Bay and commute in their droves to Canterbury.

Flawed logic

click

“…the district’s Development Requirements Study (Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners, 2011). This provided a range of scenarios for future development in the area. It found that, in order to increase the labour supply and to support new job creation in the district, a significant level of new housing was required (15,600 to support the creation of 6,500 new jobs), and that an additional 96,775sqm of employment floor space would be required to meet the anticipated needs of businesses through the Plan period.” [Draft Local Plan 3.26]

We think this is fundamentally flawed. The Council is assuming that if it builds lots of houses, employers will move to be near them and the new population. If employers really did move to be near pools of unemployed people, there would be no areas struggling with high and long-term unemployment.

In addition, let’s look at the calculation here: 15,600 new homes, each of them being multi-bedroomed and so having more than one person; just 6,500 wishful new jobs; that’s just four jobs for every ten homes. On that basis, what we would be creating here with this housing explosion is massive unemployment.

Tens of thousands more people

click

“…the main property types that the future housing market needs are those that will attract more affluent working households and families, and those that meet the needs of younger families facing deprivation and affordability problems.” [Draft Local Plan 2.64]

The Council says that we need family accommodation rather than two bed flats. So, we have based our estimate on an average size unit of three beds. The Council is proposing that we have 2,990 new homes on these five housing estates. In addition, we would have our normal share of smaller developments every year.

Looking at the figures proposed for smaller developments for the district, we estimate that our share of that would be another 1,610 new homes, making 4,600 in total. If these are mainly three bedroom homes, we are looking at an increase in population for HB of about 14,000 to 18,000 people. Herne Bay has around 38,000 people now.

The increase in the town’s population is huge – another 37% to 47%. We think that this is unworkable.

Rate of Build

click

#LPLV In the MORI poll in 2011, 61% of residents said they thought that no more than 510 new homes should be built in the district every year. Despite that, the Draft Local Plan aims to build at a rate of 780 new homes per year.

[Draft Local Plan 1.19]

Electoral Review - your chance to have a say. At last.

With the Electoral Review now underway for Canterbury I would urge local people to ask themselves if they're happy with the way Canterbury City Council currently conducts matters on their behalf.

The Council have asked the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to cut the number of councillors down to 38 from 50.

They say that the 'Strong Leader and Executive' system of governance serves this city well and base their submission to the LGBCE mainly on this.

Given the absence of debate in decision making with the current Council this move will make it much harder for councillors to represent their constituents as they will not have enough time to liaise with the many groups, parishes and associations.

Our councillors already have a far higher quota of electors than other districts and will be even higher with the intended housing development in the Local Plan… an extra 780 houses per year.

The LGBCE want to hear the opinions of local people in regard to this matter and can be contacted thus by 6th August 2013:

Email: reviews@lgbce.org.uk

Write to: The Review Officer (Canterbury), LGBCE, Layden House, 76-78 Turnmill Street, London, EC1M 5LG

Yours sincerely

Lynette Coleman, Canterbury

Proposed cut in councillors could make a bad situation worse

The Shape and Health of our Local Democracy

Canterbury City Council is proposing to cut the number of local councillors in the district from 50 to 38.  The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) has just initiated a public consultation on whether to approve this proposal.  As residents, we need to consider the implications of such a drastic cut as they could be significant for the shape and health of our local democracy.  

The first question is:

what impact will a 25% decrease in Council size have on the way in which decisions are made?

The Council's submission to the Boundary Commission claims that the current 'Strong Leader and Executive system' is well embedded in our local democracy and that the number of councillors should be reduced accordingly.   However, many residents would disagree with both this assertion and this conclusion.  Far from being embedded in our local democracy, the Executive System is becoming the source of increasing political disquiet.

The Executive system was introduced in 2002 as a result of a change in national legislation.   It was supposed to speed up decision-making and improve accountability, but its unintended consequences have included the creation of a small political elite; a lack of in-depth debate before decisions are made; and the effective exclusion of many councillors from the decision-making process.

Under the Localism Act 2011, we are no longer obliged to keep the Executive system, but a sharp reduction in in the number of local councillors could make it more difficult for us to introduce an alternative model as these generally require a greater number of councillors.  We, therefore, need to ask the Boundary Commission to assess the requirements  of other decision-making models, such as the Cabinet Committee system operated by Kent County Council, as this may be something which we would want to introduce in the future.

The second question is:

what impact will a 25% decrease in Council size have on the ability of local councillors to represent the residents in their wards?

At present, each councillor represents on average 3,023 residents.  This is considerably higher than many other district councils.  If the number of councillors was reduced from the current 50 to 38, the average ward size would be 4,200.  If a further 780 new houses are built each year, in line with the objectives of the draft Local Plan, the ratio of residents to councillors will be considerably higher.  

Reducing the number of councillors to 38 is likely to reduce the ability of each councillor get to know their communities, listen to their concerns and represent their needs and interests.  Admittedly, some councillors currently do this much better than others, but it is the hallmark of any vibrant, healthy democracy.  A sharp reduction in the number of councillors is likely to decrease the capacity of existing councillors to fulfil this vital representational role.

The Electoral Review process provides us with the opportunity to have an active public debate on the shape and health of our local democracy.  We are unlikely to get a similar opportunity for at least another decade.  Let's not waste it! 

For more information, see: consultation.lgbce.org.uk  The deadline for the receipt of comments is: 6 August.

Comments should be sent to:

Email: reviews@lgbce.org.uk

Post: The Review Officer (Canterbury), LGBCE, Layden House, 76-78 Turnmill Street, London, EC1M 5LG

Sian Pettman, Canterbury

Local Plan: Herne Bay's 'Usual Suspects' call for Plan B

View fullsize

There may not be any violence, drugs or crime, but Herne Bay's Usual Suspects are still hoping for an explosive impact.

The group of campaigners have stepped forward to produce their own proposals for the future of the town, claiming the council's draft Local Plan would prove as disastrous as the failed heist in the Oscar-winning film.

They came up with the name after councillors complained they always heard from the "usual suspects" and instead wanted to encourage as many people as possible to have their say on the council's vision for development over the next 20 years.

The original six – Dylan Hampshire, Jason Hollingsworth, Andy Lawrence, Phil Rose, Graham Cooper and Ros McIntyre – have already been joined by others who fear the council's draft Local Plan would mean Herne Bay residents would depend on the city for jobs and shops.

It includes proposals for five new housing estates, with thousands of new homes. Phil Rose, who is also involved with the Friends of the Downs and runs website Herne Bay Matters, said:

"The plan's mad. It's just houses, houses, houses with no thought for where all these people will work, shop, educate their kids, or spend their leisure time.  Worse, Herne Bay is being used as a cash cow to pay for improvements elsewhere.

We can't let this happen.  We think that a Local Plan should be by and for local people – the Local Plan needs to listen to local voices."

He said it was vital more residents had their say and got involved, and hopes the Usual Suspects theme will encourage them. Mr Rose added:

"We thought we would have some fun with the idea in the hope of encouraging others who care about the town to stand up for its future now.  The vast majority of residents have no idea what Canterbury City Council is planning for us."

The group is also concerned that the schemes put forward by the council would force people to Canterbury because of the lack of vision for Herne Bay's town centre. Mattress-maker Dylan Hampshire, of Cockett's Mattresses, said:

"This Local Plan will stop Herne Bay from having new major food retail outlets outside that area. We won't get Sainsbury's or Tesco if this plan goes through.  So where are we supposed to shop? Canterbury! Part of the money earned from houses built in Herne Bay will be spent on a new crossing in Sturry.  Canterbury will get new shops too. The idea is clearly that we're supposed to drive to shop in Canterbury, leaving our town without retail income."

The group say job creation should be included, as well as a new secondary school for the town, and say the two doctors' surgeries planned will not be enough to cope with the thousands of extra residents. Ros McIntyre added:

"We urged Canterbury not to build on greenfield sites, but all the major housing developments are on greenfield sites – five in Herne Bay alone.  The implications are huge. These five estates will have 2,990 new houses. If Herne Bay gets its share of the usual smaller developments on top of this, we'll end up with more than 4,600 new homes. There'll be more than 15,000 more people living here – that's a 40 per cent increase on our population of 38,000."

Council spokesman Rob Davies said the draft Local Plan was out for public consultation until August 30. He added:

"We look forward to hearing the alternative proposals for Herne Bay from this group in due course."

For more information on the alternative plan, e-mail LocalPlanLocalVoice@gmail.com or visit the Speciality Food Shop in Mortimer Street.

HB Times 4th Jul 2013

Kingsmead Field sell-off is 'simply illogical'

Campaigners are urging the city council to use its draft Local Plan consultation for a rethink of its plans to sell off a field.

The Save the Kingsmead Field Campaign is battling to prevent houses being built on it and wants the authority to consider other sites for the projected 15,600 new homes which are needed for the Canterbiuy district over the next 18 years.

The Local Plan is the blueprint for the future of the district and covers everything from homes, businesses, shops, leisure facilities and the countryside. Consultation on it lasts until August 30. Save Kingsmead chairman Sue Langsdown said:

"The council says it needs to find 178 hectares of open space for development. so why sell off the 1.9 hectares of the field? It is simply illogical.

The draft Local Plan commits the council to 'protect and improve open space in the district' and 'prevent the loss of existing open space within the urban boundaries'. Why not start by protecting Kingsmead Field?"

Some 100 homes could be built on the field. which sits on the corner of the Broad Oak and Kingsmead Roads. Campaigners are calling on the council to build on the neighbouring brownfield sites of the old coach park and the Serco depot.

The Save the Kingsmead Field Campaign submitted an application for the field to be registered as a village green and expects to hear in the autumn if its application is a success. It has also started legal proceedings in the form of a judicial review which aims to overturn the council's decision to make the field available for development.

Earlier this month, dog walkers donated a bench for the field and the campaign group is hoping to photograph lm people sitting on it for a picture montage.

Log on to kingsmeadfield.blogspot.co.uk for more information about the campaign.

HB Gazette 27th Jun 2013

Local Plan: letter - Strode Farm

click

Why we don't want this development

We have objected to the development of Strode Farm for the following reasons:

• We have camcorder film of a serious flooding issue several years ago in Bullockstone Road with homes and gardens under water by over 1ft, followed later by another serious flood in which the same homes again went under water.
• What drainage will be installed to deal with the water from Home Farm to Lower Herne Road? This floods the road and in winter ices up, making the road a skating rink and causing numerous accidents.
• Strode Farm has already put in a lagoon to the north of the new bypass because of drainage problems with the land. This takes a lot of water every time we have heavy rain. What drainage is proposed to cope with the flooding there?
• The present culvert that takes water from both Hares Brook and Plenty Brook collapsed in February 2013.
• How much traffic will be trying to get out on to Bullockstone Road from the new developments which include the old golf course? The road already suffers serious problems as it is still just a small country lane with sharp bends and bad surfacing.
• What measures are going to be put in place for the safety of local residents who already take their lives in their hands trying to come out of drives and onto Bullockstone Road?
• A doctors' surgery is to be installed on the present golf course, but how will the Estuary View Minor Injuries Unit cope with such an influx of people to the area?
• What will happen about supplying more police for the area? We already have trouble with the lack of policing, and it takes time to explain to Maidstone Control where Bullockstone Road, Lower Herne Road, Owls Hatch Road, and Thornden Road are, as they are not local to the area, already causing delays in getting here.
• There are four stable yards using the roads. How are you proposing to provide safe and secure riding for them when the traffic increases and roads become even more dangerous than they already are?
• With more and more food being imported from abroad more often these days, farmland should not be developed for housing when we need to feed ourselves.

It is also delightful to be able to look out at such a green and verdant landscape which is why most people live here.

This tiny hamlet has remained unchanged for hundreds of years, with only more modern buildings being erected on the sites of the old.

Mrs Margaret Clark, Bullockstone Road, Herne Bay

HB Gazette letter 27th Jun 2013

Local Plan: doubts over golf course scheme

Plans for a Tesco on the outskirts of Herne Bay have been thrown into doubt after an application for a major development stalled.

Developers Quinn Estates have put on hold proposals to build a sports hub and supermarket on the former golf club site after questions were raised over Tesco's commitment to the scheme.

The official line is that negotiations with the retail giant, the third largest in the world, are "ongoing".

Yet the delay has been significant enough to force a rethink in strategy for Quinn Estates, which planned to build the supermarket and sports hub first before gaining planning approval for 400 homes and commercial properties.

The company now aims to submit a planning application for all its proposals together, which it says will ensure "certainty and deliverability".

Managing director Mark Quinn exclusively told the Gazette this would not rule out approaching other supermarkets or getting rid of a store all together. He said:

Mark Quinn

"We may consider not having a supermarket or having a small one. At the moment we are still negotiating with Tesco and we are not going to talk elsewhere until negotiations are resolved one way or the other. It will either have a food store or it won't. There will be housing there instead and some other mixed houses."

Once the outcome of negotiations with Tesco is clear, Quinn Estates aims to submit its new all-encompassing planning application in the fourth quarter of this year.  It then hopes to gain planning permission by this time next year, with work beginning from the middle of 2014.

Mr Quinn insists housing would be built after roads and the sports hub were put in place, including a state-of-the-art clubhouse and football, hockey and cricket pitches. He said:

"We have decided after much careful consideration that what's important is delivering what we say we are going to. The way we answer that is master planning the entire scheme and delivering it. We don't want to get planning for something and it then not to go ahead. By doing the whole scheme at once, we gain certainty and deliverability."

This latest development indicates that fears over Tesco's desire to come to Herne Bay may have been a long-running concern at Quinn Estates.

In February, Mr Quinn insisted to the Gazette his development was not reliant on a Tesco superstore being opened, but that having one would create jobs for local people and give them more shopping choice. Mr Quinn added:

"This development will definitely happen. What we are doing ensures that. All our plans are doing is evolving. They may or may not include a supermarket but we hope it does. We are waiting to see the outcome of these negotiations."

Despite several requests, Tesco had not given the Gazette a comment at the time of going to press.

HB Gazette 27th Jun 2013

Local Plan: Golf course might not get Tesco

click

The developer behind plans for a new housing estate and sports centre at the former Herne Bay golf club has vowed it will go ahead - with or without a Tesco store.

Mark Quinn, of Quinn Estates, told members of Herne Bay Town Partners last week the scheme had been delayed as negotiations continued with the retail giant. An application was due to be submitted this summer for the supermarket. as well as a sports hub that would provide a home for four town clubs.

The store would provide income to allow the sports hub to go ahead as a gift to the town. But Mr Quinn said the scheme would now be dealt with as a whole rather than in two stages, with 400 houses and commercial units as well. He said:

"I told the group we would go for it with the whole scheme. whether Tesco were a part of it or not. It means a delay of four or five months but it guarantees certainty and that is not a bad thing. It means we create a solution for the whole scheme rather than just a part of it."

Both he and Tesco bosses insisted negotiations were continuing and a spokesman for Tesco said it remained committed to the scheme. Mr Quinn added:

"What is important for me is that we don't let down the sports clubs and that I deliver what I said I would. We are certain that it will happen and it will take place. Whether Tesco are in the mix or not, it will go ahead. I have spoken to all the chairmen of the sports groups and we are really confident with what is going on."

The hub would bring together Herne Bay's youth football team. cricket club, tennis club and hockey club on one site. A planning application should be submitted by the end of this year. and work could start by the middle of next year. It is expected to take 18 months to complete.

HB Times 27th Jun 2013

Westgate trial a success. Earth is flat. Unicorns fart glitter.

Cllr Vickery-Jones is a reliable stock of laughter - it's a bit like having a town jester. Long after the Westgate trial has been shut down by KCC and a collective sigh of relief has echoed around Canterbury, our local flat-earther insists it was a success. Nearly. If only we had all given it just a little more time. And damn anyone who dares to differ.

In fact, I think this outburst is better explained by the Conservative's instinctive and visceral hatred of anything that damages the impression of party unity. Independent thinkers, users of logic and fans of self-evident facts are tolerated only for as long as they keep their horrid little thoughts to themselves. 

Those who dare to peep over the parapet and whisper obvious home truths like "the emperor has no clothes" or "the traffic trial is a cock-up" are rounded on and publicly insulted by their colleagues. In some cases, the party whip is removed, stripping them of influence, and presumably income. This is what the Conservatives then pass off as 'party unity'.

---

Cllr Peter Vickery-Jones

The Westgate Towers saga took an extraordinary twist this week when the city council's transport supremo launched a vitriolic attack on a former party colleague.

Cllr Peter Vickery-Jones, who maintains the year-long traffic trial was a success, branded trial opponent David Hirst a "dinosaur" and accused him of "talking obvious rubbish" after Cllr Hirst said buses were to blame for much of the congestion in St Dunstan's Street.

It is the latest clash in an increasingly acrimonious war between the scheme's supporters and its detractors. Cllr Hirst lost the Conservative party whip on Canterbury City Council in February after he backed calls for Kent County Council to scrap it and restore the original road layout.

The trial began in March last year and saw vehicles banned from passing through the gate way of the 14th century towers. Traffic lights governed movement around the towers and only buses were allowed to enter St Peter's Place from St Dunstan's Street.

Cllr Vickery-Jones, the council's executive member for transport, was one of its most ardent supporters. Writing in response to a letter from Cllr Hirst in last week's Gazette, Cllr Vickery-Jones said:

"There are many like Cllr Hirst who have access to the facts but choose to ignore them. I recognise that because we did not challenge misconceptions and explain what and why we were running the trial, we lost the debate over the efficacy of the trial because we were unwilling to publicly counter the aggressive and insulting adverse propaganda."

Cllr Vickery-Jones says pollution in lower St Dunstan's Street, North Lane, St Peter's Place and Pound Lane dropped by 50% "with no corresponding increase elsewhere", while the number of cars fell by 12%. He added:

"The Westgate Traffic trial was not a failure. It was starting to bed down and beginning to work. Other routes were being found, other means of travel were being tried, hence the growth in bus usage. It never was an attack on car drivers, only an attempt to encourage those 35% of drivers who could reasonably do so to leave their cars and opt for sustainable travel."

KCC, which looks after the county's roads network, reopened the towers to traffic when it restored the original road system in April.

Cllr Alex Perkins

Pet scheme was a disaster and farce

Lib Dem group leader Alex Perkins believes Peter Vickery-Jones should resign over the Westgate Towers traffic scheme. He describes the scheme as a disaster and a farce. He said:

"It's a shame to see two councillors tearing into each other in public - and while it's tempting just to leave them to it, on this occasion it is only fair to point out that Cllr Hirst is in fact obviously right.

It must be hard for Cllr Vickery-Jones to accept that statistical analysis of his pet scheme has shown it to have been a total disaster, but sadly that is what has happened.

The trial was a farce. It was badly managed by Peter Vickery-Jones and just made a bad situation far worse and upset a great many people.

A better man would resign. But we know from bitter experience that it doesn't matter how badly this current administration muck things up, oblivious to their many shortcomings, they just accuse everyone who holds differing opinions of 'being political' and sail on regardless."

HB Gazette 27th Jun 2013

Councillors to be cut by a quarter

That's a quarter OF them, not OFF them.

Here's an attack on local democracy that will damage not just Herne Bay, but the whole district.

Reducing the number of councillors from 50 to 38 is not something that the public have been clamouring for - it was initiated by, and is being driven by, CCC's Conservative administration. More accurately, the Executive. Which means Cllr John Gilbey.

The publicly stated reason for this is to save money. Cllr Peter Lee has said that the current 50 councillors cost about £450k a year, so this would potentially save about £112k.

Fewer representatives and less representation to save £112k. And this from the people who frittered £60k on the disastrous Westgate Towers traffic scheme, and peed away over £50k fighting the village green application for the Downs, and regularly give £20k to the Sandwich Open golf beano, and so on, and so on.

We already have one of the highest ratios of residents to councillors, and this reduction in the number of councillors would push it even higher. And that's without taking into account the extra 40,000 or so new residents that would move in to the district to fill all the new homes proposed in the draft Local Plan, which would push the ratio higher still.

When this was discussed in Council, one of the councillors argued that the reduction in numbers would result in an improvement in quality of councillors. I can't believe these people are so naive! This will not be a careful culling exercise where the sub-prime and lacklustre are shown the door, leaving only the shining stars. Come election time, the public will still choose a mixed bag of useful and useless, daft and deft, lions and donkeys. But there will fewer of them.

Each councillor - and this is a part-time job, remember - would have significantly more people to represent. This will inevitably damage our local democracy.

I'm sorry to say this is another example of Cllr Gilbey's anti-democratic - and in my view morally repugnant - instincts. He operates what is amusingly referred to in his job description as the "strong leader" management style, and is much happier with the Executive/cabinet model rather than the more democratic Committee structure we used to have.

Reducing the number of councillors would suit him down to the ground, as it would concentrate power in even fewer hands. 

The consultation runs from 25th June to 6th August. Please  take the time to contact the Boundary Commission and let them know what you think - it would be years, possibly decades, before we would have a chance to undo this.

I don't want fewer councillors, I want better councillors.

---

The independent Local Government Boundary Commission for England is asking local people how many councillors they think should represent Canterbury City Council in the future after proposing chopping 12 from the current structure.

The six-week public consultation is the first part of an electoral review which will also consider changes to the number, names and boundaries of the council’s wards. It follows hot on the heels of a proposed shake-up at Shepway District Council which is suggesting a reduction of 16 councillors.

The commission has considered evidence submitted to it by the council and is now consulting residents on a proposal that would see the authority represented by 38 councillors in future, 12 fewer than the current arrangements.

Max Caller, chair of the commission, said:

“This is your chance to shape your council for the future. We are asking people across Canterbury whether they agree that 38 councillors is the right number to represent their area in the future. We want to know if you think 38 is the right number of councillors to be able to take decisions effectively and whether it’s the right number to represent the interests of all Canterbury’s communities.

If you don’t agree that Canterbury should be represented by 38 councillors, we want you to tell us your alternative and why you think there should be more, or fewer, members of the council in the future. Once we have taken a view on the number of councillors, we will re-draw ward boundaries to accommodate those elected members and we will ask local people to have their say during that process as well.”

Residents can have their say directly at consultation.lgbce.org.uk

kentnews.co.uk 25th Jun 2013