"To put the record straight, the owners of Kent Science Park have no wish to develop homes in the vicinity of the science park"
Showing records 31 to 40 of 88
14 Sep 2009
Councillors stated at the recent planning meeting that Ecologia would be creating 33 new jobs, but initially all they will be doing is moving these jobs from existing offices
01 Jun 2009
The revelation that the Kent Science Park wishes to expand on an even larger footprint than originally proposed five years ago has shocked many people.
28 May 2009
It is with interest that we note from the latest press release entitled ‘Jobs Figure wrong’ from the Kent Science Park which once again attempts to justify its employment figures, that their employments figures have rapidly deteriorated.
30 Mar 2009
An independent transport appraisal of the 4 Hectare expansion plans states that there are a number of significant issues and impacts arising from the proposed development.
29 Mar 2009
Kent Science Park has submitted an application to extend the park by 4 hectares beyond the security fence whilst at the same time admitting that the parks occupancy is only 60%.
18 Feb 2009
Only 13% of jobs at the Kent Science Park have gone to people living in Sittingbourne.
17 Feb 2009
The park has recently submitted two planning applications, one for two single storey technology units and the other for a 4 hectare expansion outside of the security fence.
29 Jan 2009
The Kent Science Park has been sold to us as a centre of excellence and high tech innovation but basic arithmetic certainly isn’t their forte.
21 Sep 2008
Not much actually. The reality is that although they have been allowed to expand beyond the security fence the new arrivals building is there to support the existing KSP site within the security fence, and not intended to support any future expansion of the site beyond the security fence.
08 Sep 2008
The downside to holding a debate between a small group of businesses and supporting government agencies with a vested interest in expanding the park is the rather one sided and inaccurate viewpoint it will invariably produce.