don't read the menu options and go directly to the page content 
"To put the record straight, the owners of Kent Science Park have no wish to develop homes in the vicinity of the science park"

James Speck

The housing

5,000 houses over 230 acres of Swale countryside to be constructed with the sole purpose of funding a road that is also not required.

If that's not bad enough this equates to 49 properties per hectare on average, which is the kind of density only found in inner city developments. KCC's own consultants concluded that this was not appropriate for a development of this size even if you were to accept this very high density.

To put this into perspective Sonora fields one of the largest developments in the Swale has only 950 dwellings on 37ha (91 acres) of land giving a density of 25.68. We have five times as much housing on just a site just two and a half times the size.

Kent County councillor Keith Ferrin called the proposed development of 5,000 homes the equivalent of a modern day slum.

Bapchild Housing Rodmersham Housing
Click for enlarged image of housing sites


We barley have the infrastructure to cope with the existing community needs and Swale are to build another 13,500 homes in the next twenty years. Another 5,000 in additional to this would make a difficult situation intolerable.

With no new secondary school until at the very least 2016 its not a question of which school are my children to go to, but which town? The development at Iwade already forces extra traffic on the roads with their daily trips to Faversham, the only place with capicty left. But are we building new homes in Faversham where the school places are? Quite simply no, Faversham is almost a development free zone and whilst we don't wish to impose any further development on Faversham, we must recognise that Sittingbourne and Sheppey can not continue to take Faversham's share of the housing needs.