500 new homes plan Near Dover Cliffs
 

Brownfield Land.


A Pathetic Nature Group
is trying to stop it.

Works Due to start in 4 months or so.

Its Ideal to Build on.

Ref : BBC Local News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-33070054

IF its brownfield then I don't see a problem.

Near the crumbling cliffs :worry:

Not that near the Cliffs.


I used that to give people a Idea
of it Location

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uaEJ1v8gGO...s1600/foth.jpg
Well away from the Cliffs

Yes its Crazy
this Old Folks Nature group are trying to stop New Homes?

http://www.dover-kent.com/Pictures/Western-Heights2.jpg
Also a Hotel to be Built

Looks like a nice plot, thing is whilst we want houses built no one wants them built in their area

Its a Zone that is baron
Ideal to Build on.


Get it Going

Like everyone else, can't see a problem if it's a brownfield site.

Yes it must go ahead,

this is my county Kent you are talking about, and in an historically important location. The 2 things together make it difficult to be approved, whether it makes sense or not

That pic is of a country club, hotel and tennis courts... where are the homes?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uaEJ1v8gGO...s1600/foth.jpg


At this time
I think we only have a plan layout

Why would you move into one?

We need more homes. And it's brownfield. So long as these are affordable then I don't see anything I can fault.

Even if it were green field, I understand we want to preserve some nature, but people having homes is far more important.

I wouldn't be so quick to accept, isn't brownfield possibly contaminated land? What are the risks?

I agree. Also, I'd be interested to know what they mean when they say "outstanding natural beauty". Like I get it, all nature is beautiful blah blah, but I'd be surprised if any of these campaigners sleep in a field at night. I'm sure their homes were once built on 'natural beauty' too.

No Risks in this Zone
its Solid Ground, Chalk.

I agree
build more new homes now

Not necessarily, it really just means land that has been previously used for other things. So it depends what was there before, basically.

I know there is a need for new housing, but why use green land (an ever dwindling supply of green land) when there are lots of sites within towns that are unused and mouldering quietly away.
In Skipton there was a huge mill, which eventually shut down and some enterprising person converted that huge factory into really nice apartments. Thereby creating more accomodation and using something that otherwise would have been a bit of an eyesore if allowed to sink into ruin.

I went down to the showhome and tbh the "sea view" was a little to close for my liking

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...?itok=0ukC2KFS

That's true actually, I never really thought about that. So many abandoned buildings etc, makes a lot more sense to convert them before moving onto new land?

the residents will live life on the edge.

No its not near the very Edge

I did say possibly didn't I?

Defining brownfield land suitable for new housing
13.‘Brownfield' (previously developed) land is defined in Annex 2 of the National
Planning Policy Framework as:
Land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of
the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the
curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. This
excludes:
• land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings;
• land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill
purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development
control procedures;
• land in built-up areas such as private residential gardens, parks, recreation
grounds and allotments; and
• land that was previously-developed, but where the remains of the permanent
structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time.

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...tion_Paper.pdf