Hoo Development Framework
Search form responses
Results for Mr Phillip Vipond search
New searchI have no issue with the expressed high-level vision but the devil is in the detail. The more detailed explanation of the development framework vision contains all the usual planning rhetoric, platitudes and unrealistic/unenforecable aspirations that have a tendency to evaporate once the hard pressed, and often ineffectual local planning /building control regime meets the hard-nosed economic reality espoused by landowners and developers (and the 'national interest' objectives of Central Government). One stated aspect of 'the vision' is to respect the present rural nature of the area. Another is to provide improved ammenities for the benefit of local residents. However, the proposals effectively create one urban mass connecting the existing settlements of Chattenden and Hoo St Werburgh with only token 'green corridors' and bits of amenity land to 'differentiate between 'neighbourhoods'. I also question whether the majority of existing residents feel they actually need improved accessibility and services. The over-development proposed is likely to have the opposite effect! Although there is no mention of it in the framework document, everyone knows that this is basically being driven by housing targets imposed by Central Government. Given recent political events perhaps the targets will be dispensed with, or at least modified, before too long??
The proposed 'green corridors' are totally inadequate and will do little to maintain visual separation between existing settlements or improve the natural environment. The area would certainly benefit from a concerted effort to plant more trees but there is unlikely to be a specific policy to ensure that happens. The 'green corridors' are more likely to be relatively narrow strips of grass and shrubbery with odd bits of 'amenity land' scattered about between blocks of new housing. Of particular concern is the proposal for recent development to be extended even further on either side of Peninsula Way, up towards the ridge line. This would have a huge visual impact when approaching the peninsula from Four Elms Hill and, of itself, would undermine the professed environmental vision. There are already issues with air quality along the dual-carriageway. It makes little sense to build yet more houses in close proximity to this road, which will become even busier as new development proceeds beyond Hoo. The separation between settlements needs to be far more extensive i.e. no Deangate Ridge neighbourhood and, the proposed West of Hoo neighbourhood reduced in size by at least half so that it does not extend beyond the existing building line along Main Road. The transport proposals are vague. There is nothing in the framework document to suggest that the road network, already suffering from pinch points in several places, will be sufficiently upgraded to cope with the inevitable increase in traffic volumes. With regard to the proposed neighbourhood amenities, I would suggest the commercial elements 'within 5 minutes walk of residents' will mostly be economically unviable and/or will have a detrimental effect on existing provision. (I can think of at least one large estate not a million miles away where there were no takers for the constructed commercial space which then had to be converted to an alternative use). References to 'garden city' developments of the past is all very laudable but in reality how many modern housing estates actually come close to this ideal?
As already stated, the proposals constitute gross over-development with little or no regard for the current environment. I can see the logic of extending development to the East of Hoo to infill up to the proposed new passenger rail line - but is that really meeting local demand for housing or is it aimed at those escaping the relatively high property values of London and who will continue to commute in to the centre? (I would hope that the existing power lines will be taken underground through any new development parallel to the proposed passenger railway. A line of highly visible pylons will not do much for property values!).
As stated, the proposed Deangate Ridge neighbourhood should be abandoned entirely and the West of Hoo neighbourhood substantially reduced to create a much larger 'green corridor' connecting Lower Upnor/Medway riverside with an enlarged public space incorporating the former Deangate Ridge Gold Course on the north side of Peninsula Way. That should not then justify a suggested bridge halfway along Peninsular Way (which would in itself be a visual intrusion) since there would be no residential accommodation to either side and pedestrian access routes from Main Road and Bells Lane roundabouts would be sufficient. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve the natural environment by creating a significant new Country Park to ameliorate the adverse impact currently posed by Peninsula Way, and which will only get worse with the additional housing proposed for the wider area, and to maintain effective separation between settlements. To end up with the usual hotch-potch of square boxes marching up either side of Peninsular Way would be an absolute travesty.
Hopefully common sense will prevail for the benefit of future generations rather than an ill-considered knee-jerk reaction to meet current targets imposed by Central Government.
