Search This Site

Saturday, 27 September 2008

Recent Updates - 26 September 2008

In the Recent Updates' section on the right, the 2 top entries have been added to the previous list. The 2 new ones are:

1) Proposed Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 10' email from Peter Wood

2) Proposed Lorry park - Kentish Express 18 September 2008 - 'Why are Lorry sites secret' and 'Moveable barrier' articles (Note - Please just click on the link to make the print larger and then after reading click on the back arrow in the top left of the screen).

Friday, 19 September 2008

Recent Updates - 19 September 2008

In the Recent Updates' section on the right, the 2 top entries have been added to the previous list. The 2 new ones are:

1) Proposed Lorry park - the double page spread in the Kentish Express 11 September 2008 including:

a) Stack site may face flood danger, says KCC report, and
b) Moveable barrier will help ease traffic chaos

(Note - click on each Newspaper article to increase its size to easily read the print, once read then click on the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return and read the next article or be able to click back to the home page)

2) Proposed Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

Note -

and the ones added around 10 September are:

3)) Composting facility - Photos from Ian Medgett taken in August

4) Composting facility - A letter from Brian Ellis "The Thin Edge of the Wedge" - outlining the issues and what you need to do now

5) Composting facility - Objection email sent by Ian Medgett to Ashford government council - re the Planning Application 08/01373

6) Lorry park - Ian Medgett email to inform us that a tree preservation order is finally in place

7) Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

8) 'Proposed Lorry park' report referred to in the 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

After looking at any of these, just click on the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column or use the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return back to here.

Wednesday, 10 September 2008

Composting Facility Church Lane and other news this week

We now have a 3rd issue facing the local area - a proposed Composting facility at Church Lane, Aldington. Hence, you will see tis website now covers information about all 3 of these.

Regarding the proposed Composting Facility at Church Lane you need to urgently send your objection by 18th September 2008 - send an e-mail or write to the KCC Planning Officer and make your voice heard (information in right-hand column - number 2 - see below) , it appears that this application will go to committee and it is here that your letters will truly count.'

Additional information is that Ashford have now published all of the submitted documents onto the planning website section, including the application drawings. The application reference there is 08/01373AS.

Judging from experience with Shepway and the Quarry it would be wise for objectors to write to both Ashford and KCC - Richard Alderton at ABC and S. Whyman at KCC.

_________________________________________________________________

The recent information added in the last week can be found in the section in the right-hand column entitled 'Recent News', just below the 'Home Page' Section. It includes:

1) Composting facility - Photos from Ian Medgett taken in August

2) Composting facility - A letter from Brian Ellis "The Thin Edge of the Wedge" - outlining the issues and what you need to do now

3) Composting facility - Objection email sent by Ian Medgett to Ashford government council - re the Planning Application 08/01373

4) Lorry park - Ian Medgett email to inform us that a tree preservation order is finally in place

5) Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

6) 'Proposed Lorry park' report referred to in the 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

After looking at any of these, just click on the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column or use the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return back to here.

Monday, 8 September 2008

Chilly response to plans for huge lorry park - Kentish Express report - 3rd September

The following report was published in the Kentish Express on Wednesday 3rd September, click on the link to view:

http://www.kentishexpress.co.uk/news/default.asp?article_id=47424

To return here, click the 'back' arrow in the top left of the screen.

Monday, 11 August 2008

Sellindge And District Association - Address to the Meeting on 24th June 2008 - Sellindge Village News August 2008

To see the above article in the Sellindge Village News August 2008 issue please go to the section in the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Contacts' section, called 'Sellindge And District Residents Association - Address to the Meeting on June 24th 2008' and just click.

Please don't forget to click the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column to return to here.

Tuesday, 5 August 2008

Otterpool Quarry Water Issues - the Facts

To see a letter from a member of the Sellindge and District Residents Assocation on the 'Otterpool Quarry Water issues - the Facts' please go to the section in the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Sellindge And District Residents Association - Address to the Meeting on 24th June 2008' section, and just click.

Please don't forget to click the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column to return to here.

Friday, 1 August 2008

Shepway District Council Planning Committee Meeting unanimously Reject the Waste Plant application

Monday, 28 July 2008

Havoc in the hedgerows: The truth about life in the country

Havoc in the hedgerows: The truth about life in the country.

Click on the link below to read an article in 23rd July 08 Independant. It includes a section on the local proposed AD. Click on the 'Back' arrow in the top left of the Article to return to here.......

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/house-and-home/property/havoc-in-the-hedgerows-the-truth-about-life-in-the-country-874503.html

Mention the countryside and you think of natural silence broken only by birdsong. But many new initiatives have undermined the notion of the British rural idyll in recent years. Our favourite AD unit gets a mention in the Indy

Friday, 25 July 2008

Sellindge Proposed Sites - Map

A new section entitled 'Map of Sellindge', just below the 'Shepway District Planning Meeting - 29th July 2008' section, has a link to a Google map of Sellindge highlighting, via the blue balloon type shapes, the approximate position, from top to bottom, of certain points of interest:

1) The Proposed Lorry Park Site


2) The Airport Cafe

3) The Proposed Otterpool Quarry Site

4) Port Lympne Zoo

If you click on the blue balloon, a text box is displayed showing which is which. Other features of google map can be used such as display the map in terrain or map mode, zoom in/out, move up/down.

Thursday, 24 July 2008

Waste Plant Meeting - Tuesday 29th July 08, 7pm, in the Civic Centre Folkesone

U R G E N T

In the Folkestone Herald 24th July, at the bottom of page 2, the Headline is 'Village awaits decision on waste plant'. The last paragraph states....

"Shepway District Council's development control committee will discuss the planning application for the site just off the A20 next week at a public meeting in the Civic Centre in Folkestone on Tuesday 29th July at 7pm. The final decision will be made by KCC this year. "

We must all attend this public meeting to make sure our feelings are known!! Please let others know and come along if at all possible.

Click on the scanned article and then it should be readable. You may be able to click on the 'back' arrow in the top left to return to here - failing that just go to this website again.


Monday, 7 July 2008

Anaerobic Digester information via 'letsrecycle' website

The website http://www.letsrecycle.com/ has lots of interesting information on Anaerobic Digester (AD) plants, including in the UK. If you put the phrase 'anaerobic digester' in the search option (found near the top right of the screen) then many useful and relevant links are displayed.

In the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Contacts' section, are some interesting ones found so far.

As one of the links states: "It must be remembered that anaerobic digestion processing for food waste has never been proven in a full scale facility in the UK. While other companies have built anaerobic digesters (including Biogen in Bedford, Biotech in Holsworthy and EarthTech in Stornaway) Greenfinch is the only plant taking around 90% food waste as its feedstock and this, is still as Mr Chesshire describes it, a "sub-commercial" project."

Sunday, 6 July 2008

The Merton Policy - planners not permitted to develop without Assessing the Impact on the Local Environment and Residents

There is a very interesting policy called 'the Merton Policy', concerning the Protection of the Environment . This is to do with renewable energy sources, not just AD plants, but these are mentioned. The main point being that planners are not permitted to 'develop' where these would impact on the Local Environment and Residential Developments without following the Council requirements.

Have a look at the Policy www.merton.gov.uk/udpprotectionenv.pdf for the detail. The following Sections look particularly relevant:

PE.1: Air Quality (proposed developments that have a significantly adverse effect on Air Quality will not be permitted - the Council will require ....)

PE.2: Pollution and Amenity (proposed developments that have a significantly adverse effect on Nearby Occupiers or on the Amenity of the Locality by Noise and Disturbance or Air Pollution or Adverse Discharge onto the Land or into the water Systems will not be permitted - the Council will require ....)

PE.6: Water Quality (proposed developments that would lead to Pollution of Groundwater or Surface Water by reason of their Waste Water Discharge or Surface Water will not be permitted - the Council will ....)

PE.10: Waste Facilities (proposed Applications for Waste Management Facilities, such as for the Storage or Waste or Refuse, Waste Treatment and Reprocessing Plants including Concrete crushers, Incineration Plants and Waste Transfer/Bulk Reducing Stations will not be permitted outside the designated Industrial Areas - the Council will ....)

Need for an Environmental Impact Assessment for the Proposed Anaerobic Digesteion Plant

Saturday, 5 July 2008

Meeting with the KCC on 24th June at the Village Hall

The local papers recently published articles following the above meeting can be viewed in the section on the right below the 'letsrecycle website links' section.

Click on the newspaper article to increase the size.

Friday, 27 June 2008

Infringement under the Tort of Nuisance - The Proposed Recycling Plant at Sellindge

Thursday, 26 June 2008

Interim Schedule of Concerns re the Proposed Development of a Waste Treatment Plant and Associated Facilities at Otterpool Quarry - 24th June 2008

This document has been prepared for and on behalf of the residents of Sellindge and neighbouring villages including Newingreen, Lympne, Stanford with Westenhanger (The Residents) who would be adversely affected as a consequence of the proposed development of a Waste Treatment Plant at the Quarry Site on the corner of Otterpool Lane and the A20 in Sellindge.

It categorises the concerns of The Residents and expresses their concerns in summary form only. A more detailed report by the Sellindge and District Residents Association will be prepared and provided as a formal submission to Kent County Council Planning Applications Committee and our elected representatives.

1 Physical Appearance

1.1 There is a lack of information about the physical appearance of the proposal. No contextual elevations have been submitted with the application.

1.2 The size of the proposed development is completely out of proportion to the surroundings and to the needs of the local area population for waste disposal.

1.3 The planning application provides some indication of individual building heights. From this information we conclude that the proposed development would be overly dominant in the local landscape.

1.4 The proposed development would sit on rising ground above the village of Sellindge in a dominant position on the skyline viewed from the village.

1.5 It would also dominate the view from Folkestone Racecourse, parts of the Port Lympne Wild Animal Park, Newingreen, Westenhanger and, very importantly, from the North Downs AONB.

1.6 It would be visible from Farthing Common and other viewpoints on the Downs,

1.7 The main buildings would tower over the Airport Café on the A20, an important local landmark and meeting point, as well as other residential properties of Newingreen and the main part of Sellindge starting within 500 metres of the site.

1.8 There is a paucity of information in the application concerning the impact on the surrounding sight lines.

1.9 If this were a residential proposal of similar physical size, it would be rejected for the above reasons. For these reasons we request that an accurate visual representation of the proposed development be provided for public viewing in Sellindge Village Hall.

2 Traffic and Access

2.1 This proposal forecasts from 152 to 168 lorry movements in total per day. This number does not include vehicles required to remove waste water from the site, there being no consent to discharge waste water.

2.2 Our calculations show that were this operation working at full capacity, the already high proposed level of traffic movements is significantly understated.

2.3 Traffic movements required for staff and management appear to have been calculated without a clear statement of the actual numbers of personnel to be employed.

2.4 The effects of the additional traffic would exacerbate other traffic increases resulting from the further extension of the Lympne Industrial Park (Link Park 2) now under way, the proposed enlargement of the Holiday Extras site at Newingreen and increasing commuter traffic using Westenhanger Station.

2.5 The effects of additional traffic through the village of Sellindge, and especially the already busy A20 junction at Newingreen, would not be tolerated by The Residents, any more than the additional pollution and increased threat to safety.

2.6 We believe the traffic impact assessment conclusions to be flawed and significantly understated. The applicant should be asked to reconcile the assessment so that it is consistent with the proposed development operating at full capacity.

3 Operational Activities

3.1 There is nothing in the application which properly explains the proposed operation to the members of this community.

3.2 Residents are very concerned at the lack of information about exactly what material would be processed at the site, its origin and distance travelled, as in this respect the application appears to be at variance with the Proximity Principle underwritten by National Planning Policy Statements.

3.3 In the absence of any express discussion with the applicant, residents are unable to follow much of the logic as presented in the application, and the criteria used to reach conclusions on noise, odour and waste output.

3.4 The applicant is asked to provide full details of disposal and transportation of grey and black waters together with digestion plant process residues from the site within the declared lorry movements.

3.5 The application is silent concerning detailed movements of waste and other materials within the site and the applicant is asked to provide this.

3.6 The application does not show analysis that will have been carried out quantifying the risks to human health from airborne pollution, especially particulates and the necessary mitigation controls.

3.7 The Residents are concerned about the production of hazardous gases, including methane and hydrogen sulphide, and their discharge into the air above Sellindge and any potential danger this might pose to the area, The Residents, and the endangered species programme of the Port Lympne Wild Animal Park. These gases are a danger to health and we request a full independent safety report detailing any risks to health and quality of life from them in such close proximity to residential areas.

3.8 The applicant should be asked to provide a detailed process map to explain the methods to be used in all aspects of the operation of the plant, showing all controls and how these controls will be independently monitored to ensure effectiveness.

3.9 The output from the processes envisaged, including noxious substances, would need to be removed and The Residents are concerned about what exactly these products are.

3.10 Residents are concerned how output from the site would be moved safely, where it would be taken and by what route.

3.11 We are further concerned about any potential risk to public health in the event that any part of the processing stages fail and a build-up and/or backlog of inbound or outbound material occur.

3.12 Residents would under no circumstances be prepared to tolerate any accumulation of rotting and foetid waste building up within proximity of the Villages.

4 Environmental and Ecological Impact

4.1 The Residents are angered by the decision by KCC not to carry out a full Environmental Impact Assessment as required under European Directive and Town and Country Planning Regulations in relation to this application, including the thorough consideration of alternative sites. It is the view of this community that such a requirement must be met in full. Failure to do so will be robustly challenged.

4.2 We highlight that the Environment Agency list this site as vulnerable, being located on part of the Kent North Downs Wealden Aquifer.

4.3 The Residents of the area therefore require a full Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out in respect of this application and that this be insisted upon by our elected representatives.

4.4 The Residents believe that this proposal is not in accordance with the requirements of the current draft Kent Waste Plan.

4.5 Residents are concerned at the absence of detail concerning bunding, containment of waste, hazardous materials, the control of hazardous operations, and a Safety Risk Assessment for this operation and the applicant should be asked to provide this.

4.6 Residents are concerned about proposals for the control and containment of vermin, flies and other nuisances.

4.7 We are concerned about the ecological and visual impact the proposed plant would have on the local area which includes the North Downs AONB

4.8 We are concerned about the effect this proposed development would have on the Folkestone Bed (Lower Greensand) Aquifer and potentially disastrous environmental consequences.

4.9 The proposed site is alongside a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The proposed development would have inevitable affect by arresting groundwater movement, with consequential downstream impact.

4.10 The submission documents claim that the proposed development is environmentally friendly. Contrary to this our view is that it is environmentally unsound. It is certain that this proposed development would significantly add to the phenomenon of global warming by reason of all aspects of the project, and as such is unsustainable.

4.11 This application is the second commercial waste treatment facility within 1 mile of Sellindge and is absolutely unacceptable.

5 Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal

5.1 Drinking water shortages throughout the South-East are frequently headline news. The Folkestone Bed (Lower Greensand) Aquifer is the second most important source of drinking water supply in Kent. The proposed development jeopardises future opportunities to use this aquifer for public water supply, or other uses, and this is unacceptable for all of Kent. We reiterate our demands for a full Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out.

5.2 The Residents are concerned that the application does not show how much water would be consumed by the plant when in operation. We believe that this must relate to the volume of liquids leaving the site although the application makes no reference at all to these matters.

5.3 The application refers to an existing consent to discharge surface water applying to the site. It does not. A surface water discharge consent was granted to Redland Aggregates in 1989 but has long been defunct.

5.4 We have noted that no active surface water discharge consent exists for this location. There is also no foul water sewer in reasonable vicinity of the site.

5.5 Sections of the local foul drainage network are already overloaded and under stress, overflowing when operating at full capacity, a fact logged by the residents of Westenhanger and the Environment Agency.

5.6 If the applicant intends to avoid employing road tankers to remove liquid waste from the site, a mains sewer to serve the site would have to be constructed, connected to the existing network, and that network extended and upgraded. We have yet to see the calculations of the waste output from the site and associated operations.

5.7 The Environment Agency requires full details of drainage proposals and protections for the site before it will consider or grant any plant facility operating licences. Detailed drainage design is a fundamental criteria for installations of this sort and should be evaluated within the main body of the planning submission. These issues are too important to be left to be dealt with as future conditional matters.

5.8 Groundwater levels in the local area are naturally high and the proposals do not show how the development would respond to this. The proposal envisages the construction of very large buildings, with correspondingly deep foundations for which no detail is provided. These must affect the local aquifer and groundwater flows. We require assurances and details of how these would be achieved without adversely affecting the groundwater.

5.9 We would expect the applicant to have to demonstrate site specific solutions to these fundamental issues.

5.10 The applicant states that conventional petrol interceptors will be used to remove contaminants from site area surface water run off. This technology would only separate any petroleum oils and not deal with water-borne contaminants. The application is entirely silent on the possibility of toxins escaping from the plant and methods of containment.

5.11 We are astonished that the application seems to have given these fundamental issues such little attention, and are most unhappy that the strategy to be adopted by the applicant for dealing with surface water drainage, foul water and industrial discharges is so unclear.

5.12 We would expect the applicant to demonstrate site specific solutions to these fundamental issues. The applicant is asked to specify their strategy, the risks associated with those matters, the controls that would be in place and the methods they would use to ensure all controls are effective.

5.13 These items are too important to be left to a condition in any proposed planning approval and we require the issues to be attended to before the application is considered.

6 Noise, Odour and Nuisance

6.1 Airborne particulates and dust from the Mixed Recycling Facility operation would soil the surrounding areas.

6.2 Insufficient study has been carried out to assess the true effect that noise and light pollution from the operation of the site would have on residents in Sellindge, Newingreen and Lympne.

6.3 Workers in the Lympne Industrial Estate would suffer diminished and unpleasant working conditions from the potential for airborne particulate spread.

6.4 Noise generation from on-site handling of MRF waste would include glass and metals “clattering” which would magnify the impact of intrusive noise.

7 Local Economic Impact

7.1 We are concerned about the effects that this plant, the traffic movements, the noxious odours, the prospect of airborne pollution, the visual impact and the operation would have on the local people, their economy and amenity.

7.2 The site is on a signposted tourist trail which highlights the beauty and history of the local area.

7.3 It would adversely impact the businesses of Folkestone Racecourse, Port Lympne Wild Animal Park, Westenhanger Castle and The Airport Café.

7.4 It would blight local property and depress values significantly.

8 Governance

8.1 The applicant should be asked to provide clear evidence of the strategy, economic case and business plan for this proposal. We believe that local waste output would be insufficient to satisfy a plant development of this size and that waste would be brought from increasingly greater distances to the site for processing.

8.2 The applicant should be asked to disclose details of any public contracts that it has been awarded in respect of this proposed operation and strategy.

8.3 We are concerned that additional requirements would have significant effect on the business case for this development. We have computed this to be marginal based on the consumption and extent of processing declared by the applicant.

8.4 We are concerned for public safety, the impact on public health and the dangers this proposal poses to the local environment and ecology. We are concerned that the application provides no information on disaster planning and this should be requested from the applicant before the application is considered.

8.5 We are concerned to establish the capacity of the applicant to withstand business interruption, given the information in the public domain about the applicant company's financial status.

8.6 We are very concerned that should the business plan for this proposal fail, in full or in part, this development would become an even greater and graver economic, environmental and ecological crisis for the local and surrounding community.

8.7 We request evidence of the applicant’s ability and bona fides to construct and operate a facility of such size which we believe would be one of the biggest in Europe.

9 Sustainability

9.1 This is not a sustainable solution to the problems of waste recycling, regionally or locally.

9.2 We are extremely concerned that the extent of vehicle movements makes this an environmentally unfriendly proposition

9.3 There are no proposals for dealing with biogas. Methane, the main by-product, is 20 times more significant than carbon dioxide as a climate change gas.

9.4 KCC has a statutory obligation to develop a Waste Plan for the County. We know that they have been doing this for many years and this site has not featured in this debate. The Quarry site must not be regarded as acceptable simply as a matter of political convenience.

Summary

The Residents of Sellindge and surrounding areas have the above concerns and these will be presented to the members of the Kent County Council Planning Applications Committee when they visit Sellindge to hear the concerns of The Residents. This schedule will also be issued formally to place on record. The intensity of residents' views has previously been evidenced by a large attendance at a Parish Council meeting held on Tuesday 1st April 2008 and by a public march on 3rd May 2008 attended by over 600 residents.

Communication

This summary of the concerns of The Residents has been compiled from views expressed by Residents and specialists that have offered their support and help. It will be circulated to The Residents by email, village newsletters, or flyers and by placing it on http://www.slurry.org.uk/ which provides full information about the work of the Sellindge and District Residents Association on behalf of the Residents. It will also be copied to our current elected Parish, District and County Council representatives, and to the sitting Member of Parliament for the area.

Signed

The Residents of Sellindge, Newingreen, Lympne, Westenhanger, Monks Horton, Broad Green and surrounding areas

Date

24 June 2008.


© 2008 Sellindge & District Residents Association 998.080622
with thanks to CPRE Kent for their support.
Save Valuable Resources! Don't print this out unless absolutely necessary!

Sunday, 15 June 2008

Meeting at Sellindge Village Hall with the KCC Planning Team - Tuesday 24th June, 7 pm

Saturday, 31 May 2008

Response from a local resident to a letter received from the KCC re the Anaerobic Digestion Plant, Otterpool Lane

Letter from: local resident (name withheld)
To: Sharon Thompson, Head of Planning Control, Kent County Council

Subject: APPLICATION: SH/08/124 - Anaerobic Digestion Plant, Otterpool Lane

Thank you for your letter notifying us of the above planning application, however we can’t help wondering if this is not just a paper exercise your department is doing because it would appear that the owners of the proposed Recycling Plant seem to have employed contractors to clear the land and prepare it for construction. From that one can only assume that they are pretty confident that they will get the `Go Ahead’ sooner or later.


However we would still like to lodge our three main objections to this proposal which are `Smell’, `Transport’ and `Speed’. Before my recent retirement I worked as a Plant Engineer for chemical companies in Silver Town. London and Willow Lane, Mitcham. Both plants were forever being visited by the Environmental Dept. because no matter how good or modern their equipment they could not stop nasty smells escaping from the plant causing distress to the local population. It will happen here also because this plant is being sited too close to the village of Sellindge. This sort of plant really needs to be sited in an area already blighted by similar factories.

On the subject of Transport we have heard that a large number of Lorries will be needed to bring in the waste material and an equally large number to remove it once treated. We all know that the Lorries traveling from the west side of the plant will leave the motorway at junction 10 and travel through the village. A village which already suffers from a considerable traffic flow. We have heard that some Transport companies on the Lympne Industrial Estate had Planning Conditions imposed on them by the Planning Office to direct their drivers to leave the M20 from junction 11; if this is true then they (the companies) and the council are certainly not enforcing it. Therefore any similar conditions that you may apply to this application should it succeed, will go unnoticed.

With elderly people crossing to the doctors surgery and children crossing to the village school speed has always been a problem and a worry for the local population, a road that is fairly straight and therefore tempting for drivers to proceed down it at a faster speed than legally allowed and with the likely large increase in heavy lorry traffic it may be only a matter of time before we have a serious accident here. Even without the extra lorries, we need right now, some form of traffic calming measures built into this road, such as road islands or chicanes to help resolve this problem. (As at Capel-le-Ferne which is also an A-class road suffering from operation Stack).

Yours Sincerely


Stack roads misery to continue for at least a year

KM KentOnline published an article on 30th May 2008 - "Stack roads misery to continue for at least a year"

To view this article go via the 'Useful websites' section in the right-hand column.

Friday, 30 May 2008

The seventh email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Counciland
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council


Welcome to the seventh email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

Dear All,

I have learnt that yesterday KCC stated at a KCC committee meeting open to the public that they had missed the window of opportunity this year for carrying out an Environmental Impact Assessment. They say that therefore a formal planning application is unlikely to be published until mid 2009.

This delay whilst highly regrettable in that it extends the period of blight on the communities affected does, I hope, give KCC the opportunity to have a thorough and open review of all the options available for dealing with the undoubted problems of both Operation Stack and overnight lorry parking. It also provides the ideal opportunity to conduct the pre-application public consultation previously mooted by KCC, but never implemented.

Thank you all for your continuing support.

Regards,

Peter

Cllr Peter Wood

The sixth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Counciland
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council


Welcome to the sixth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

I draw your particular attention to the very important paragraph in [blue] text below.

Dear All,

There has been no concrete news (no pun intended!) forthcoming from KCC since the last email newsletter. That said, there has however been a fair amount of media-oriented spin coming from County Hall. In addition, the Leader of KCC has expressed some interesting views regarding the proposed Lorry Park – of which more below. We understand that the Department for Transport (DfT) has again made it very clear to KCC that, as things stand, the UK taxpayers will not fund the Lorry Park project and they have instructed KCC to put together a business plan if they wish to pursue the case. This business plan is scheduled to be presented to the Leader of KCC (and presumably the Cabinet and Members) around mid-June, after which it will be submitted to the DfT where it will no doubt progress slowly (especially given summer holidays) through official channels. On that basis, it seems highly unlikely that there will be any sign of a formal planning application until the autumn at the earliest.

You will recall the formal, detailed letter of objection sent by Officers at Ashford Borough Council to KCC on 7th April 2008 (copies available on request). I understand that, other than a very short letter of acknowledgment, there has been no response whatsoever to the detailed queries set out in the letter. One can only presume, indeed hope, that KCC is having difficulties formulating sensible answers to the points raised.

On the media front, the Kentish Express has continued to provide extensive and balanced news and views on the Lorry Park controversy. The TV and radio coverage of the campaign has slackened for the time being, but this is to be expected. That said, it must be acknowledged that all branches of the media gave excellent coverage to the hugely successful Sellindge protest march (attendance 500 – 600 people) at the beginning of this month – congratulations to the Sellindge Residents Association, who organised it.

[blue]Returning to views put forward by the Leader of KCC, he has apparently told MPs, MEPs and County Councillors that the media has been fully supportive of KCC’s Lorry Park proposals and that most of the coverage has been in favour of KCC and that hardly any negative coverage has been received. In addition, in the context of local resistance to the Lorry Park, the Leader of KCC has claimed to County Council members that he has received “very few letters from Aldington, and quite a few from round the County supporting.”

It’s inconceivable that the Leader of our County would be economical with the truth and so one can only conclude that his Officers have kept the hundreds of protest letters and emails from him. Clearly something must be done to bring the protests to the Leader’s direct attention, and to that end Matt Baldwin of the Lorry Park Alliance has penned the following message to you all.


Dear Lorry Park Alliance Member,

Paul Carter, the leader at Kent County Council, is claiming that he has received more letters of support for the proposed lorry park between junction 10 and 11 than against. We do not believe this to be the case, but would suggest that a second round of letter writing begin as soon as possible. It has also been suggested that letters be sent to his home address, addressed to Mr P Carter, rather than Cllr Paul Carter – he is more likely to open them if he believes they are private letters, and once open he will find it harder to ignore.

Mr P Carter lives at:

Langley Park House,
Langley,
Maidstone,
Kent,
ME17 3NQ
Langley


Some suggested themes for the letters:


· Why the lack of consultation with the public over the lorry park – maybe suggesting that he pays residents a visit
· Why did he announce the vast lorry testing station at the lorry park in such an underhand way and not through the normal channels (see previous Lorry Park news email)
· When is he going to make public the rationale behind the Aldington site and publicly state where the other 15 sites are and why they were discounted
· A planning application is currently before Ashford BC for a lorry testing station. If granted, that will remove the need for a testing station at the lorry park.

Paul Carter is also likely to respond with a standard letter – many of us will have already received a copy. If it doesn’t answer any specific points put to him, write back asking that he address your points personally rather than fobbing you off with a standard reply. This really annoys him as it takes up quite a bit of his time. And if he doesn’t respond, it does leave the door open for you to write again.

In terms of getting our message across, there are two Blogs that have been very supportive of our campaign and you might like to bookmark and monitor them. They are:

http://sludgeandlorrypark.blogspot.com

http://save-kent.blogspot.com

In the interest of ‘balance’ it would be churlish not also to draw your attention to:

· the KCC Leader’s blog, which is:
http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/democracy-and-elections/cabinet/leaders-blog.htm

· a blog we believe to be supported by freight industry interests and/or Monserat Properties Ltd, which is:
http://www.operationstack.co.uk

If anyone is aware of other relevant blogs please let me know.

Finally, if you have not already seen it, I recommend that you read CPRE’s formal response to KCC regarding the Lorry Park proposals “Taking the Sting out of Stack”. This can be downloaded from the CPRE website:
http://www.cprekent.org.uk

I will continue to keep you fully informed as matters progress. If you are aware of anyone who wishes to be kept in touch, but who has not received this email, please ask them to contact me by email so that their details can be added to the distribution list.

I must again stress that my colleagues and I are not opposed to a solution for either Operation Stack or for overnight lorry parking. However, we are opposed to these current proposals which are ill-conceived and hastily cobbled together with inadequate evaluation of alternatives and without consultation. We also consider that KCC is seeking to impose a wholly local solution to a problem that is in fact a national and pan-European issue.

Thank you all for your continuing support.

Regards,

Peter


Cllr Peter Wood
Saxon Shore Ward
Member of the Executive
Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Tuesday, 20 May 2008

Kentish Express - 15th May 2008

Click on the newspaper article below to increase the size....



Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) Website links

The CPRE have provided links to information on their website. Please have a look at these, which you can easily access via the right-hand column in the 'CPRE website links' section, immediately below the 'Contacts' section.

On-line Petition against the Lorry Park's proposed location

Here is a link to an online petition against the lorry park's proposed location. It just takes a minute to complete - together we can make a difference.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/lorrypark/

Sunday, 18 May 2008

Recent Letter from Paul Carter to a local resident



Wednesday, 7 May 2008

Letter to the Village from the Committee Chairman

Dear Sellindge Residents

Sellindge congratulates Sellindge! On behalf of all who live peacefully in Sellindge and the Sellindge and District Residents Association I would like to offer congratulations and thanks for the very impressive and enthusiastic turnout last Saturday 3rd May 2008. We also want to thank all those from the surrounding villages and even from London who supported us.

Estimates vary but we are certain that between 500 to 600 people joined the march between the Village Hall and the Airport Café. What was especially encouraging were the large number of young people from babes in prams to vocally active teenagers who made their protesting views very clear to both Countrystyle Recycling Ltd and the Kent County Council’s Planning Office. In fact partly due to the large volume of protest letters that have been sent and also to the large number of protesters on Saturday, Angela Watts, who is the Planning Officer for KCC with responsibility for dealing with the Countrystyle proposal, has said today that KCC Planning Department will be coming to Sellindge later in June. They will inspect the site and call a meeting for villagers to express their views directly to Planning Officers and others concerned with the issue

We also had very good press and television coverage managing to get excellent and much sought for placement on Meridian Afternoon News and the BBC’s South East News. Now we must continue to keep the momentum going if we are to defeat the proposals made by Countrystyle Recycling Ltd. Many have signed the general petition which we shall put to good use. We need to encourage as many as possible – in fact all of us need to sign a specific Petition which will declare opposition to the use of the Quarry as a site for processing waste of any kind. This Petition will go to the Planning Department of KCC and will be presented to the Planning Committee when they consider the proposal later this summer. It is vital that everyone in your home signs it as it will be directly taken in to account by Planning Committee members.

Your Sellindge and District Residents Association are now involved in preparing technical objections to the scheme in readiness for a Planning hearing. If anyone is able to offer technical advice we will be grateful for your assistance. I am very keen to begin investigating alternatives to the large scale treatment of 21st century municipal and industrial waste and would welcome anyone, but especially young people to assist. If a sufficient number of people volunteer we might be able to get a grant to help finance such a project.

We shall be keeping you regularly informed of our progress on all fronts. We are also planning other events during the summer that will express the unity of our views. Thank you once again for making a very considerable effort and in the glorious words of Ian Medgett ringing in our ears we look forward to meeting you all again soon:

“KCC – You can stuff your Lorry Park right up your Sludge Digester”

Ronald Lello
Committee Chairman

Saturday, 3 May 2008

Protest March on 3rd May 2008



What a great turnout for Sellindge!!

In the top section of the right-hand column, you can find and easily click on the links to many more Photos, an Article in KentOnLine and two Videos of the march.

Monday, 28 April 2008

Otterpool quarry - Road Junction A20

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent:27 April 2008 11.19
To:SusannePavelkova@aol.com; susancarey@rdwd.co.uk; Richard.bore@kent.gov.uk; Richard.Alderton@ashford.gov.uk; PHILIPPA.DALE@ashford.gov.uk; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk; jennyhollingsbee@fsmail.net; contact.centre@kent.gov.uk; sean.furey@cprekent.org.uk
CC: sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: Otterpool quarry.Road juncion A20.

Dear Councillors.

It has come to my knowledge that the site that is rapidly steaming ahead is in fact an ancient Saxon burial site where 100 years ago there was an excavation and many burial artefacts were found. Should this not be a scheduled site?

There are many very ancient manors in this area so it has been inhabited for a long time. Berwick is probably the oldest in England given by King Canute to Eadsy a priest in 1032. Bellview was the home of the Constable of Dover and Warden of the Cinque Ports in 1216-1272 and was named thus because of the beautiful view. Westenhanger Castle is in Stanford but is very much part of Bellview, Berwick and Otterpool.

Have any archaeological surveys been carried out on this and the extension of the industrial park? The road just at this junction is with Barrow Hill ( burial place).

I feel that things are being steamrollered along before essential investigations have been done. We lost a lot of crucial ancient relics when the channel tunnel was built through Saltwood and I can see the same thing happening here. The more I learn about this area the more fascinating it becomes. We should be nurturing this area for tourists and advertising the history of this area, not putting it all under concrete .

Yours Sincerely

Monday, 21 April 2008

The fifth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008;
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Welcome to the fifth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

I draw your particular attention to the very important paragraph in [blue] text below.

Dear All,

Thank you to all those who attended the Lorry Park Alliance meeting held on Saturday 19th April at Brabourne & Smeeth Village Hall. The meeting was extremely well attended and brings the total number of people who have attended Lorry Park Alliance meetings close to 700. To this number must be added the many, many people who have expressed their support for the Lorry Park Alliance campaign, but have not attended one of the four public meetings.

Damian Green MP was able to attend the Brabourne & Smeeth meeting and he, together with members of the Lorry Park Alliance, dealt with a variety of questions related to the proposed Lorry Park. Unfortunately, Keith Ferrin (Kent County Council Cabinet Member for Highways), felt unable to attend the meeting and, even more disappointingly, KCC failed to provide an alternative speaker to represent their views. It is a sad reflection on the state of democracy when our County Council cannot, or will not, provide a spokesperson on what is, by any standards, a major infrastructural project of widespread interest and concern to a vast number of electors in Kent. We are however fortunate that the two MPs most affected by the proposal, Michael Howard and Damian Green, have constructively participated in the public meetings.

Cllr Paul Clokie, Leader of Ashford Borough Council, sent his apologies, but did provide a statement of his views on the Lorry Park issue and parts of that statement were read out at the meeting. Of particular note are Cllr Clokie’s comments that:
"Neither I nor the Council’s officers have been presented with any clearly evidenced rationale that off-motorway parking of the sort proposed is the right solution. Even if that case were to be made, we would still need to be convinced that the site proposed is the best available and that it is sustainable in terms of the medium to long term projections for freight traffic."

"So in response to the question as to whether I support the current proposals from Kent County Council? My answer must be that ‘No I do not’ as I strongly believe that there are other solutions yet to be explored."

"The report [Channel State of Freight Report ] goes on to suggest that these lorry parks [closer to Dover than Aldington/Smeeth] should be financed by the port of Dover, which seems a very sensible proposition that places no direct financial burden on the tax payers of Kent and reflects the causal nature of the problem. "

The full text of Cllr Clokie’s statement is attached to this email.

Particular points that were raised at the meeting included:

The timescale for publication of a formal Lorry Park planning application. On the one hand Keith Ferrin stated at last week’s public meeting that KCC’s planning application would be published 6 to 8 weeks from 1st April i.e. by end May latest. On the other hand he is quoted in this week’s press as saying that “a fully detailed planning application should be ready for consultation in a year’s time”. Given that one of the Directors of KCC very recently stated that “We still don’t know if a lorry park will work technically.”, it seems probable that the planning application will not see the light of day for quite some time. If, as now seems probable, the release of the planning application is some way away, then it is unconscionable that KCC have been so premature in their announcement of the Lorry Park proposals. Such recklessness only serves to cause grossly unnecessary anxiety and blight for the residents of the area.

The charge for using the Lorry Park. Both Paul Carter (Leader of KCC) and Keith Ferrin have recently stated that it is their intention that the proposed permanent Lorry Park for 500 vehicles should be free of charge. Their apparent motivation for this is that they believe, or have been misled into believing, that at a stroke this will eliminate all unauthorised overnight lorry parking in lay-bys and in industrial estates such as Orbital Park. However, the reality is that there will always be a large number of lorry drivers who, for a variety of reasons, prefer to park outside the confines of an organised lorry park. Parking fines will not deter such drivers as the UK does not aggressively pursue the collection of fines from drivers of foreign vehicles. A free lorry park also implies that access to the Lorry Park will not be as regulated as is currently the case with commercial lorry parks. Consequently, it is inevitable that the Lorry Park will attract permanent, or semi-permanent, residents including illegal ‘O’ license operators, and will become a dumping ground or storage area for surplus vehicles. Finally, such a free facility will put out of business what few commercial lorry parks we do have in Kent and in neighbouring counties – a curious economic strategy for a Conservative-led County Council.

The involvement of Monserat Properties Ltd. Many of you will recall that some years ago this company proposed a new motorway junction at Evegate, a link road to the A2070 and the concreting over of greenfield sites in the East Stour valley. Since those proposals were firmly rebuffed by Ashford Borough Council, local parish councils and residents, Monserat has been actively lobbying the government, KCC and various quangos and has retained its controlling options over much land in the area. It is Monserat who controls the land upon which KCC proposes to put its Lorry Park and Monserat has been actively supporting KCC’s proposals. Furthermore, behind the scenes, Monserat has been supporting and funding various groups who are actively lobbying in favour of the proposed Lorry Park at Aldington-Smeeth. Paul Bartlett (Deputy Leader of Ashford Borough Council) very forcefully made the point at the meeting that if the Lorry Park were to proceed, then it would be the thin edge of the wedge with companies such as Monserat seeking to exploit the situation and infill the green fields between Smeeth and urban Ashford.

The planning decision-making process. Many people expressed grave concerns regarding the undemocratic process, where KCC would be granting themselves planning permission. It was generally considered that were this allowed to happen then it would be a gross injustice and probably in breach of residents’ statutory human rights. The Lorry Park Alliance members and Damian Green all expressed the view that the planning application should be ‘called in’ by the government (i.e. taken out of KCC’s hands) and determined by a Public Enquiry that reported to the Minister of State. At some point in the future it will be essential for us all to lobby GOSE (Government Office for the South East) and central government to ensure that this ‘call in’ takes place.

Something that only came to my attention subsequent to the close of this Saturday’s meeting is the statement by Paul Carter in the latest edition of the KCC quarterly newspaper “Around Kent”. In a full page article devoted to the proposed Lorry Park “off Church Lane, Aldington” he refers to the lorry park for 500 vehicles and goes on to say “Adjacent to this is the potential for a vast testing station to be able to carry out comprehensive tests on potential illegal vehicles and an additional 2,500 ….. parking spaces for Operation Stack”. So it now appears that he expects Aldington/Smeeth to shoulder not only the burden of the previously announced 500 vehicle permanent Lorry Park and the 2,500 vehicle operation Stack Lorry Park, but also a “vast testing station”! He goes on to say “we are trying to design an environmentally sensitive solution to the treatment of this larger area.” I cannot understand how KCC, knowing of the adverse, indeed highly critical, reaction generated by their bungled announcement of the Lorry Park proposal, could use such an underhand tactic to announce the addition of this “vast testing station”. To make an announcement of such a major project buried in an obscure publication which many immediately ‘bin’, and others such as myself never receive, takes the concept of ‘burying the bad news’ to new depths.

I will continue to keep you fully informed as matters progress. If you are aware of anyone who wishes to be kept in touch, but who has not received this email, please ask them to contact me by email so that their details can be added to the distribution list.

I must again stress that my colleagues and I are not opposed to a solution for either Operation Stack or for overnight lorry parking. However, we are opposed to these current proposals which are ill-conceived and hastily cobbled together with inadequate evaluation of alternatives and without consultation. We also consider that KCC is seeking to impose a wholly local solution to a problem that is in fact a national and pan-European issue.

Thank you all for your continuing support.
Regards,

Peter

Cllr Peter Wood
Saxon Shore Ward
Member of the Executive
Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Saturday, 19 April 2008

Statement by Cllr Paul Clokie OBE, Leader of Ashford Borough Council

By Cllr Paul Clokie OBE, 19 April 2008;
Leader of Ashford Borough Council

I fully recognise the problems caused by overnight lorry parking in the borough and also by operation stack, both of which have frequently caused considerable inconvenience to the residents of the borough.

Neither I nor the Council’s officers have been presented with any clearly evidenced rationale that off-motorway parking of the sort proposed is the right solution. Even if that case were to be made, we would still need to be convinced that the site proposed is the best available and that it is sustainable in terms of the medium to long term projections for freight traffic. In addition, this project is currently unfunded and the government has declared that they will not pay for it, and so I believe that this proposal is unlikely to happen in the near future.

I am a great supporter of the Quick Moveable Barrier (QMB) and as such I wish it to be given a fair test and then, if successful, extended to between Junction 8 and Junction 9 – a proposal that was I understand put forward by the government, but rejected by Kent County Council. Such a QMB would at least keep Kent moving and would also use the substantial tarmac surfaces already extant rather than concreting over 70+ acres of Kentish green field. So in response to the question as to whether I support the current proposals from Kent County Council? My answer must be that ‘No I do not’ as I strongly believe that there are other solutions yet to be explored.

This leaves the question of overnight parking should the Truck-stop at Waterbrook close – a matter which is by no means certain. This would give rise to a far more difficult problem that may eventually lead to the need to find locations for about 500 lorries (in excess of 1,000 has been mooted). I do not believe that our borough is best suited for such purposes. Particularly so, as such a lorry park would need substantial and costly on/off works as it could not be accommodated at an existing motorway junction. On balance, I favour the view recently published by the Channel Corridor Partnership that stated:


“the main need is for additional lorry parking facilities on the Channel
Corridor, preferably at or near to the major ports/Channel Tunnel.”

The report goes on to suggest that these lorry parks should be financed by the port of Dover, which seems a very sensible proposition that places no direct financial burden on the tax payers of Kent and reflects the causal nature of the problem.

Finally, I view with great unease the fact that the County Council is single-handedly seeking to remedy a situation that is in reality a national and pan-European problem and, as such, requires resolution at that level.

Paul Clokie
19th April 2008

Friday, 18 April 2008

Update for villagers - Progress the Sellindge and District Residents Association has made in the fight against the Lorry Park and Sludge Dump

SELLINDGE STILL SAYS NO......

NO TO....
  • RECYCLING PLANT - 154 LORRIES PER DAY - on top of what we already have!!!!
  • NOISE 24/7
  • SMELLS
  • 40' HIGH BUILDING
  • WATER POLLUTION
A petition will be doing the rounds in the villages, please do sign this when you get a knock at the door from our dedicated team of foot soldiers.

Please keep 3rd May 2008, free at 11am, for our walk/cycle/drive from Sellindge Village Hall car park, to the Airport Café. Please do come out in force and show the people of Kent we do not want their rubbish and to show Europe we don’t want the lorry park as a permanent feature on our beautiful landscape, when it will probably only be used a handful of times every year!

Once at the Airport Café we are hoping there will be live music and that you will enter into the party atmosphere!

The Committee members are:

  • Ronald Lello - Chairman/Spokesman (tel. no. 01303 813140)
  • Nick Taylor - Treasurer
  • Margaret Ludlow - Village Networker (tel. no. 01303 813369)
  • David Plumstead - Transport & Recycling
  • Les Barratt - Water
  • Bob Edden - Policy
  • Ian Medgett - Ecology & Environment
  • Penny Knight - Researcher
  • Carol Taylor - Publicity
This website has been formed for easier communication with everyone, if you would like to enter information please email it to: Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Carol can be contacted through the email address.

Thursday, 17 April 2008

Response from Paul Carter, Kent County Council, to Local Residents' emails

Local Residents emails to Paul Carter with his response:


















Paul Carter's response was the same to these................




Wednesday, 9 April 2008

Information and Objection Contacts

There have been several very well attended meetings and a lot of media coverage about the plight of Sellindge and the environment with the threat of the lorry park and the Anaerobic Digester opposite the Airport Cafe. The email address is Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk if you want to send any information that will help.

This website http://www.slurry.org.uk/ (stands for Sludge/ lorry) enables any news to be spread quickly without anybody else's involvement.

This campaign is amazingly very intensive but we still need your help. We still have time to state our objections to:

Cllr Paul.Carter@kent.gov.uk - leader of KCC,
Mick.Sutch@kent.gov.uk - head of planning KCC,
Cllr Paul.Clokie@ashford.gov.uk - leader of Ashford Borough Council.
Richard.Alderton@ashford.gov.uk - head of planning and development,
greend@parliament.uk - Damian Green Ashford MP
Howardm@parliament.uk - Michael Howard Folkestone and Hythe MP enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk
and of course all the local papers.

Keep May 3rd 2008 at 11am free to walk from the Village Hall to the Airport Cafe for a bit of a party.

Sunday, 30 March 2008

Sludge and Lorry Park

Dear Resident

Your local district and county councillors are opposed to the announcement made by Kent County Council this week to build a lorry park on the outside of Sellindge and we are currently formulating a plan to fight this with our colleagues from Smeeth and Aldington and interested parties in the village.

If like us you are opposed to this plan, make your voice heard in every way possible - as many times as possible.

There will be a series of public meetings with one at Sellindge Sports Centre, Swan Lane Sellindge at 4pm on Saturday 29th March and one at 6pm on Saturday 29th March Aldington Village hall. In the meantime, many of you are asking what you can do.

Write, email or call all of the people on the right under the section 'Contacts at the Council and Press' to express your opposition and copy us in so we can add your names to our mailing lists (both email and letter).

If you hear the subject being discussed on local radio - please get in touch with them and make your views known.

We will keep you updated with news as it happens.
Kind regards

Jenny Hollingsbee
District Councillor
Snowdrop
Swan Lane
Sellindge, TN25 6EB
jennyhollingsbee@fsmail.net

and

Susan Carey
County Councillor
North House
116A North Road
Hythe, CT21 5DY
susancarey@rdwd.co.uk

Tuesday, 1 January 2008

Folkestone Herald - 07.08.08


Otterpool Quarry Water Report - the Facts

Disclaimer

The articles contained in this website are for general informational purposes only and have been provided by various sources including the public, newspaper content and local bodies. These articles are then presented by Sellindge & District Residents Association on this website, and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk. In no event will we be liable for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from loss of data or profits arising out of, or in connection with, the use of this website.

Through this website you are able to link to other websites which are not under the control of Sellindge & District Residents Association. We have no control over the nature, content and availability of those sites. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, Sellindge & District Residents Association takes no responsibility for, and will not be liable for, the website being temporarily unavailable due to technical issues beyond our control. This website may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. The Sellindge & District Residents Association has no business relationship with any organisations mentioned in this website.