Question 10

Read Question 10 Here (opens in new window)

Teynham appears to be viewed by SBC as a ‘thriving village’ and therefore capable of development.  Teynham’s status as a ‘service centre’ must be called into question given the diminishing services/assets over at least twenty years.  New housing has no prospect of improving that position through over-optimistic social engineering.

Dumping housing in some forlorn hope that urban services will be duplicated or enhanced in villages is unachievable and misguided.  For example, Health Commissioners (with reference to the Love Lane development in Faversham) have already said health centres in towns are the way forward – so when Teynham loses its last GP, its status drops further.

Building in Teynham is a strategy for building for cars.  The dubious label of ‘thriving’ villages is not an argument for changing them through out of scale developments.  It threatens the heritage value of villages that have evolved in harmony with their environment.  SBC is adopting a ‘numbers game’ based on an indefensible and unexplained ‘fairness’ policy.  This lacks analysis and strategic appreciation of how the needs of the borough are best served.  These homes would be isolated from the most stable and diverse mainstays of our Borough.

As has been stated by KCC and CPRE, Teynham is just about the worst possible place in Swale for investing in more housing.

Stop TAO

For further help or guidance on submitting your responses, please email:

This website is published by the following local residents in Lynsted and Teynham: • Terry Hewett • Bruce Bell • Charlotte White • Paul Townson • Nigel Heriz-Smith • Dylan Winder

November 2021

©  All rights reserved.