The post you are reporting:
Andrew you might get answers to your questions more readily if you were less aggressive & accusatory.The local plan [LDF] is based on economic & demographic predictions for the District. These assumptions are not work undertaken by DDC planners or members but completed by economic planning experts from the independent sector & demographers from KCC. They are factors that they believe will manifest in Dover District in the next twenty years. Housing supply although controversial forms only a small part of the total picture.Currently according to the statistics Dover's workforce is made of 2/3 inward bound workers from outside our area to 1/3 local. Not a very good sitiuation from either the environment [pollution thru. journeys] or our local economy , whereby the income derived from our area is being spent elsewhere. This might then manifest in the type of retail/leisure options Dover has or has not.If we had gone for the lowest option of housing supply the statistics identified that 10-15% of our local workforce would have disappeared thru age over 20 years & not been replaced locally.
Four housing options were put forward for consideration 6100, 8100, 10000,14000.The lowest two would have left us with deficits in our current workforce [not even addressing 2/3 -1/3 inward labour imbalance]. Option 3, 10000 property units started picking up the new growth opportunities indentified in an independent business development report. Option 4 had a more positive impact but was still behind the requisite number for housing growth of 20000 plus [which we declined to look at or accept]I hope that gives you an insight into the analysis.If we now go the process.
DDC set up an advisory group to provide recommendations for the LDF, dealing with all the aspects of the local plan. This group were not only elected members[cross party] & DDC officers but local people & groups who represented a wider view of the District. A member of Parish Councils, one representing Town Councils, two members of the local strategic partnership[voluntary groups, churches & business] & others completed the group. They have met for nearly four years to arrive at a recommendation that will go to DDC on Wednesday.Without discension they all ageed that growth was the only way forward & growth on a scale that dealt with the communities aspirations. The overwhelming results to consultation was growth & "get on with it".So now we come to the land allocation for growth. This obviously is the contentious part of the process.Frankly this is one that no can one win. Someone has to have growth. You can spread it across the District & lose critical mass in obtaining full infrastructure support or concentrate in larger groupings & deliver a development that delivers a comprehensive infrastructure package. There are obviously brown field sites that will take up over 50% of land allocation requirements. They include the Buckland Mill site , Connaught Barracks , potential release of hospital land at Coombe Valley,site at Barwick Rd. & more. Andy Stevens has also identified other urban Dover opportunities for change in designation with which I concur.So the green field take is probably about 40% which includes 1000+ units at Aylesham , roughly 700 in Deal & other sites throughout the villages complementing the totals.Then we arrive at Whitfield where the identified allocations could be approx. 2000 to the East , joining up with A256 roundabout & approx. 4000 to the West. I have run out of posting space. So will cut off here. I will continue if requested.
